SOME  THOUGHTS 

CONCERNING 

DOMESTIC    SLAVERY, 

4 

IN     A     LETTER 

To  ,   ESQ.    OF   BALTIMORE. 


' 


BY    JOHN    L.    CAREY. 


SecontJ  SWlfon. 


BALTIMORE. 

J       MKl'JVNER,     1     N.    CHARLES    STREET. 
1839. 


LOAN 


SOME    THOUGHTS 


CONCERNING 


DOMESTIC    SLAVERY, 

IN    A    LETTER 
To  -  -  ,  Esq.  of  Baltimore. 


MY  DEAR  SIR  : 

CONCERNING  the  subject  of  domestic 
slavery,  which  has  often  formed  matter  of  con 
versation  between  us,  I  have  determined  to  write 
you  my  thoughts  somewhat  at  length.  For  I  have 
meditated  much  upon  it  since  I  saw  you  last;  and 
now  that  we  can  no  longer  meet  at  pleasure,  as  we 
were  wont,  to  interchange  discourse,  my  reflections 
have  accumulated  upon  me  to  such  a  degree  that 
no  means  of  setting  them  forth  would  perhaps  be 
so  suitable  as  this:  to  say  nothing  of  my  own  dis 
position,  which  inclines  me  rather  to  writing  than 
to  talking. 

I  have  read  Dr.  Channing's  book,  which  you 

were  so  kind  as  to  send  me.     Shall  I  preface  the 

2 

G50 


expressions  of  my  disappointment  by  empty  com 
pliments  to  a  skilful  writer's  abilities  7  Alas ! 
there  is  little  to  commend  in  the  greatest  abilities 
if  they  appear  to  be  employed  in  giving  attractive 
forms  to  error.  There  are  many  noble  maxims 
and  well-expressed  sentiments  scattered  through 
out  the  book;  if  these  were  collected  together  and 
printed  in  the  form  of  apothegms  they  would 
appear  to  good  advantage  ;  but  now  they  seem 
like  jewels  adorning  a  dead  man's  head,  giving 
decoration  to  that,  which,  seen  in  its  nakedness, 
would  be  revolting  to  the  sight. 

This  author,  it  appears  to  me,  has  fallen  into 
the  common  error  of  those  who  give  themselves 
up  to  the  contemplation  of  abstract  maxims,  and 
take  not  into  view  the  blended  nature  of  our 
humanity,  which  being  made  of  spirit  and  body 
is  enabled  to  receive  truths  only  in  a  correspond 
ing  manner ;  that  is  to  say,  not  nakedly  spiritual, 
such  as  abstract  truths  are,  but  truths  embodied  in 
the  elements  of  things,  circumstances,  conditions. 
Concerning  Rights,  in  particular,  I  have  something 
to  say  ;  for  upon  this  subject  Dr.  Channing  has 
thrown  together  an  unusual  quantity  of  general 
principles,  after  the  usual  manner  of  those  who 
delight  in  speculation.  We  talk  of  the  rights  of 
man,  of  natural  rights,  of  inalienable  rights.  What 
do  we  mean  ?  If  an  attempt  is  made  to  come  down 
to  particulars,  and  to  specify  what  are  these  natu- 


ral  and  inalienable  rights,  each  in  its  turn  eludes 
the  grasp;  some  other  general  phrase  is  made 
in  a  loose  way  to  sum  up  the  gross.  Or  a  more 
common  method  is  to  take  a  civilized  man,  and 
after  considering  the  various  rights  which  are 
indisputably  his,,  other  persons  are  then  contrasted 
with  him;  and  all  are  supposed  to  be  suffering 
wrong  who  are  deprived  of  any  rights  which  he 
is  acknowledged  to  possess.  In  this  way  it  may 
happen  that  one's  well-intended  indignation  against 
oppression,  or  what  he  deems  such,  shall  be  in 
proportion  to  his  own  elevation  above  others  of 
his  less  fortunate  fellows.  In  this  view  we  need 
not  wonder  that  Dr.  Channing  feels,  as  he  writes, 
with  much  earnestness;  for  who  doubts  his  great 
abilities  ? 

But  with  regard  to  natural  rights  it  appears  to 
me  that  man  is  more  poorly  provided  than  the 
brutes.  For  the  inferior  animals  have  a  natural 
right  to  food  and  drink,  which  are  supplied  ready 
at  their  need  :  whereas  man,  especially,  in  this 
climate,  has  a  right  to  sustenance  only  on  con 
dition  of  labouring  for  it.  The  right  to  the  com 
mon  air  ie  the  only  right,  that  I  know  of,  which 
man  possesses  by  nature  ;  and  this  is  his  on  such 
tenure,  not  only  because  respiration  is  so  conjoined 
with  animal  life  that  the  latter  cannot  exist  with 
out  it,  ev.cn  for  a  few  moments,  but  mainly 
because  air  for  breathing  is  not  the  product  of 


human  labour;  it  is  not  subject  to  degrees  of 
abundance  and  of  scarcity  ;  it  cannot  be  laid  up 
for  future  use ;  it  is  not  subject  to  our  control  in 
the  way  of  exercising  industry,  perseverance  or 
foresight.  Yet  even  this  right,  which  is  essential 
to  the  physical  organization,  is  not  I  presume 
inalienable,  for  it  may  be  forfeited  along  with 
life  itself;  as  we  see  does  happen  continually  in 
states  where  criminals  are  put  to  death  by  the  laws 
of  the  land,  which  were  wilfully  violated  in  full 
view  of  the  penalty  thereof. 

Yet  is  not  man  herein  the  less  favoured.  If 
rights  are  not  granted  to  him  unconditionally  as 
inherent  and  absolute,  it  is  that  he  has  the  nobler 
prerogative  of  acquiring  them  for  himself.  If  they 
are  made  to  depend  upon  the  proper  exercise  of 
his  own  powers  it  is  because  in  such  exercise  con 
sists  his  real  glory  :  because  thereby  he  attains  to 
the  excellence  of  his  nature,  to  usefulness  and 
true  happiness. 

The  phrases,  rights  of  man,  natural  rights,  and 
the  like,  are  therefore  very  ambiguous  terms, 
which  it  is  unsafe  to  bottom  general  reasonings 
on.  For  as  rights  are  conditional,  the  proper 
measure  of  them  is  to  be  found  in  the  character  of 
the  man.  To  the  possession  of  every  right  is 
annexed  the  performance  of  a  corresponding  duty, 
as  the  tenure  by  which  it  is  held.  This  perfor 
mance  ceasing,  the  right  fails!  It  is  not  that  cer- 


tain  rights  are  attached  to  certain  duties  by  way 
of  recompense,  for  the  sake  of  which  a  man  is 
called  upon  to  perform  the  duties,  but  in  the 
nature  of  things  this  connection  exists.  To  per 
form  duties  is  to  do  good,  which  implies  moral 
power;  moral  power  then  if  you  prefer  it,  may  be 
called  the  parent  of  rights.  I  do  not  use  this  term 
in  the  general  sense  in  which  it  is  sometimes  taken 
to  denote  mere  mental  superiority  in  distinction 
from  physical  force  ;  for  it  often  happens  that  this 
kind  of  power  is  coupled  with  selfish  purposes, 
and  the  respect  which  it  exacts  is  tinctured  with 
servility.  But  the  true  idea  of  moral  power  is 
made  up  of  intellectual  ability  blended  with  real 
goodness,  which  inspires  confidence  and  love. 

The  human  mind  can  be  developed,  not  in  its 
naked  spirituality,  but  by  being  conjoined  with  cer 
tain  elements  of  the  natural  and  moral  world  in 
which  we  live.  These  afford  substantial  materials 
whereby  its  operations  find  subsistence  and  per 
manence.  By  its  union  with  natural  elements, 
gaining  mastery  over  the  same  according  to  the 
established  laws  of  nature,  are  produced  the  arts ; 
whether  of  ingenuity,  of  skill  or  of  taste.  By 
means  of  facts  drawn  from  experience,  by  obser 
vation  upon  human  life,  by  knowledge  of  men 
in  their  various  modes  of  action,  maxims  of  moral 
government  are  derived  which  take  the  form  of 
laws  or  of  philosophical  truths.  Whatever  the 
2* 


10 

active  spirit  of  man  thus  combines  with  itself 
becomes  in  some  measure,  a  part  of  him,  and  he 
has  right  over  it.  But  all  such  exercises  of  the 
human  faculties  (the  same  being  developments  of 
moral  power  as  I  have  denned  it)  are  made  for 
purposes  of  good  or  usefulness,  either  general  or 
individual,  or  more  properly  both.  For  both  blend 
together  in  the  harmony  of  good  deeds.  Such 
exercises  are  therefore  called  duties — hence  the 
connection  between  duties  and  rights.  There  is 
nothing  of  exaction  or  of  oppression  in  one  man's 
possessing  rights  more  extensive  than  those  of 
another,  for  they  are  awarded  to  him  almost  in 
stinctively.  The  principle  upon  which  a  person 
refrains  from  violating  the  estate  of  his  neighbour 
is  of  a  kindred  nature  with  that  which  prompts  one 
to  pay  respect  to  a  good  and  great  man,  venerable 
by  age  and  still  more  august  by  reason  of  a  life  of 
honourable  services. 

There  is  no  prescribing  limits  to  human  rights. 
For  they  enlarge  in  proportion  as  new  relations 
arise  ;  and  new  relations  arise  in  proportion  to  the 
development  and  exercise  of  moral  power.  How 
plainly  may  this  be  seen  in  the  simple  illustration 
which  the  lowest  kind  of  labour  affords !  A  man 
acquires  a  right  to  laud,  supposing  the  same  to 
have  been  before  common,  by  improving  it;  or 
rather  by  imparting  to  it  all  of  value  that  it  may 
possess,  which  being  derived  from  himself,  re- 


11 

mains  still  his  own  peculium.  He  whose  industry 
and  skill  have  thus  appropriated  a  hundred  acres, 
possesses  rights  a  hundred  fold  greater  than  are 
his  whose  indolence  reposes  lazily  upon  one. 
Throughout  the  whole  range  of  man's  relations, 
individual,  social  or  civil,  where  knowledge  is 
employed  for  purposes  of  good,  rights  of  conse 
quence  arise  which  are  universally  reverenced  by 
the  spontaneous  acknowledgment  of  all  hearts 
that  are  human.  Let  it  be  remembered  that  the 
existence  of  rights  does  not  depend  upon  the  exis 
tence  of  a  tribunal  to  pronounce  them  such ;  nor 
upon  the  possession  of  force  which  is  sometimes 
necessary  to  make  them  respected.  For  tribunals 
themselves,  and  the  force  which  executes  their 
decrees  derive  all  their  legitimate  authority  from 
rights  that  existed  before.  They  are  the  conse 
quences  not  the  causes  of  rights,  and  are  rendered 
necessary  in  the  world  by  reason  of  the  evil  that 
yet  abounds  among  men,  which  if  left  to  work  its 
purposes  would  swallow  up  all  rights. 

A  man  of  enlightened  mind  who  has  acquired 
self-control  by  means  of  knowledge  and  virtue ; 
who  has  come  to  know  the  laws  of  nature  and  the 
principles  of  the  moral  world  ;  who  has  received 
sublime  truths  in  his  understanding  which  his  life 
has  embodied  in  noble  actions  for  the  good  of  the 
human  race  ;  a  man  of  this  character,  bearing  the 
image  of  God  in  the  aspect  of  ennobled  humanity ; 


12 

let  him  be  placed  side  by  side  with  a  savage  New 
Zealander  newly  gorged  with  a  meal  of  human 
flesh,  which  with  bloody  fingers  he  has  devoured 
half  raw,  while  the  impress  of  the  brute  blends 
with  the  image  of  the  fiend  in  every  lineament  of 
his  face— tell  me,  my  dear  sir,  is  it  possible  that 
those  two  men  can  occupy  equal  spaces  and  pos 
sess  equal  rights  (for  occupancy  is  here  the  mea 
sure  of  rights)  in  the  world  of  human  action  and 
responsibility  ? 

""•A  man's  claim  to  rights  is  just  and  proper  ac 
cording  as  he  holds  and  exercises  the  power  of  per 
forming  the  correspondent  duties.  Rights  then  are 
various.  To  talk  of  equality  of  rights  is  absurd ; 
to  talk  of  inalienable  rights  seems  not  much  bet 
ter.  For  if  rights  are  not  inherent  and  absolute, 
they  are  not  inalienable;  if  they  may  be  acquired, 
so  also  may  they  be  lost.  Does  not  the  constant 
practice  of  men  show  this,  when  they  put  culprits 
in  prison,  condemn  them  to  labour  or  stripes,  and 
even  hang  them  by  the  neck  ? 

It  may  be  asserted  as  a  general  truth,  that  all 
men  have  a  right  to  political  freedom.  But  may 
we  not  suppose  a  people,  and  that  too,  without 
going  beyond  the  record  of  facts,  or  travelling  far 
back  into  time,  who  by  their  ignorance  and  vices 
have  shown  themselves  unfit  for  the  possession  of 
this  right.  Unfit,  because  they  knew  not  the 
duties  which  such  right  of  necessity  imposes;  or 
if  they  knew,  were  incapable  of  performing  them. 


13 

Such  people  have  found  in  the  government  of  a 
monarch  that  peace  and  security  which  they  were 
unable  to  procure  for  themselves.  Nor  should 
we  be  disposed.,  I  apprehend,  to  laud  that  spirit  of 
mis-named  philanthropy,  which  would  busy  itself 
in  exciting  a  nation  of  this  kind  to  revolt,  under 
the  plea,  that  the  people  possessed  a  natural  right 
to  a  free  constitution.  For  there  is  abundant  evi 
dence  to  show  that  the  consequences  of  revolu 
tion  would  be,  to  plunge  them  into  scenes  of  con 
tinual  violence  and  bloodshed,  insomuch,  that  the 
arms  of  the  sternest  despotism  would  be  to  them 
a  desirable  refuge.  Such  people  are  not  made 
slaves  by  the  usurpation  of  a  king ;  they  had  made 
themselves  slaves  before ;  and  happy  will  they  be, 
if  now  they  may  exchange  the  capricious  domina 
tion  of  their  own  passions  for  the  steady  rule  of 
another's  well  ordered  mind.  Tyranny  is  the 
abuse  of  this  power  of  rule. 

Let  us  now  consider  the  doctrine  of  rights  in 
relation  to  slavery.  Personal  freedom  is  doubt 
less  a  right  which  every  man  ought  to  possess ; 
because  no  man  ought  to  render  himself  incapable 
of  using  it  properly.  I  would  not  reason  with  a 
man  who  should  insist  that  slavery  was  not  an 
evil  as  a  permanent  part  of  social  and  political 
institutions;  nor  with  any  one,  who  would  main 
tain  that  it  was  not  a  wrong,  in  the  general  view 
of  man's  capacities,  and  of  the  excellence  which 


14 

he  is  called  to  attain.  One  who  has  known  what 
it  is  to  be  free,  need  go  no  farther  than  his  own 
instinctive  feelings  to  be  assured  that  slavery  is  a 
wrong — a  wrong  in  the  general  view  mentioned 
above,  and  still  more  a  wrong  in  proportion  to  the 
capacity  which  the  enslaved  possess  of  under 
standing  and  of  appreciating  freedom.  Those 
who  are  acquainted  with  no  other  condition  than 
that  of  servitude,  having  been  born  to  it;  who  are 
satisfied  with  their  situation  and  desire  no  other, 
being  fit  for  no  other ;  such  persons  are  not  con 
scious  of  injury,  and  indeed  suffer  none,  that  I 
can  see,  except  in  so  far  as  the  power  of  the  mas 
ter  is  used  in  an  arbitrary  and  tyrannical  manner, 
for  purposes  of  cruelty  or  of  mere  gain,  and  with 
no  view  of  elevating  the  nature  of  the  slave,  in 
order  that  he  may,  after  a  time,  emerge  with 
safety  into  a  condition  more  befitting  a  rational 
creature. 

If  political  slavery  be  the  only  suitable  condi 
tion  for  some  people,  it  appears  to  be  but  follow 
ing  out  the  analogy,  to  suppose  that  personal  ser 
vitude  is  the  most  proper  condition  for  others,  who 
are  still  farther  sunk  in  imbecility.  It  is  indeed, 
in  many  countries  the  natural  consequence  of 
political  slavery,  when  the  rule  of  the  monarch 
becomes  tyrannical.  'In  Achim,'  says  Montes 
quieu,  'every  one  is  for  selling  himself.  Some  of 
the  chief  lords  have  not  less  than  a  thousand 


15 

slaves,  all  principal  merchants,  who  have  a  great 
number  of  slaves  themselves,  and  these  also,  are 
not  without  their  slaves.  Their  masters  are  their 
heirs  and  put  them  into  trade.  In  those  states,' 
continues  this  author,  'the  freemen  being  over 
powered  by  the  government,  have  no  better  re 
source,  than  making  themselves  slaves  to  the 
tyrants  in  office.'  'According  to  Mr.  Perry,'  says 
this  same  writer,  'the  Muscovites  sell  themselves 
very  readily.  The  reason  for  it  is  evident;  their 
liberty  is  not  worth  keeping.'  * 

A  man  must  obey  some  master.  If  that  master 
be  within  him,  ruling  by  a  sense  of  duty  and  the 
law  of  reason,  obedience  will  conduct  him  to  the 
highest  state  of  human  excellence  and  felicity. 
But  if  he  have  not  this  guide  within  himself,  he 
will  still  serve ;  but  he  will  serve  capricious 
tyrants.  For  he  will  be  enslaved  by  his  own  sen 
sual  and  selfish  passions,  than  which  no  tyranny 
is  more  intolerable.  It  is  a  good  maxim  which 
was  uttered  by  Mr.  Coleridge,  that  external  con 
trol  should  be  in  an  inverse  ratio  to  the  power  of 
inward  control.  It  may  be  the  means  of  saving  a 
people  from  self-destruction,  to  put  them  under 
service  to  some  more  steady  will  than  their  own. 
Do  you  ask  is  slavery  then  right?  How  vague 
the  question !  In  view  of  what  man  ought  to  be 
who  shall  pretend  to  say  that  it  is  right?  Nay, 

*  Spirit  of  Laws,  book  xv.  ch.  6. 


16 

who  does  not  see  that  it  is  utterly  inconsistent,  if 
continued  permanently,  with  the  full  develop 
ment  of  the  nobler  feelings  and  faculties?  Or  in 
view  of  the  uses  to  which  the  enslaved  are  often 
put;  such  as  of  traffic,  making  merchandise  of 
them;  or  of  cruel  labour,  making  mere  machines 
of  them  to  minister  to  cupidity — who  can  under 
take  to  justify  these  things?  But  the  question  of 
right  must  be  applied  in  reference  to  the  state  of 
those  who  are  captives,  and  also  to  the  character 
of  those  who  are  masters.  It  is  only  by  reason  of 
the  conditions  of  the  case  that  the  relation  becomes 
proper.  Who  finds  fault  with  a  child  because  it 
is  not  a  man  ?  Or  who  expects  from  a  child  the 
self-government  of  a  man?  How  tyrannical 
would  be  the  restraints  which  are  imposed  upon 
minors,  if  they  were  put  upon  grown  men!  Yet 
who  complains  of  them  when  applied  to  children? 
Nay,  children  themselves  seek  for  them  in  will 
ingly  placing  themselves  under  the  control  of 
those  whose  superior  wisdom  they  venerate.  Ac 
knowledging  the  control  of  parents  over  their 
children  to  be  right,  no  one  will  yet  undertake  to 
justify  all  abuses  of  such  rule.  Parental  cruelty 
can  find  no  excuse  therein. 

In  all  communities  of  men  the  principle  of 
subordination  prevails.  Ignorance  does  homage 
to  wisdom;  moral  weakness  seeks  to  put  itself 
under  the  guidance  of  some  power  which  it  finds 


17 

not  within.  Abuses  of  this  principle  also  prevail  °, 
such  as  when  prescriptive  dogmas  take  the  place 
of  wisdom,  and  extort  submission  with  bigoted 
intolerance;  and  also  when  force,  whether  deriv 
ed  from  riches,  from  office,  or  from  any  other 
source  apart  from  real  worth,  strives  to  compel 
others  into  its  train.  But  these  abuses,  so  far 
from  disproving  the  principle,  are  indeed,  evi 
dences  of  its  existence;  and  draw  their  power 
from  the  principle  which  they  pervert.  The  same 
rule  of  subordination,  when  it  acts  in  reference  to 
two  classes,  wherein  civilization  and  barbarism 
are  at  the  extremes,  takes  the  relation  of  personal 
servitude  on  the  one  hand,  and  of  personal  control 
on  the  other.  For  the  reverence  which  the  inferior 
naturally  pays  to  those  above  him,  here  becomes 
servility;  having  little  of  self-respect  to  ennoble  it. 
There  are  then  several  considerations  to  be  taken 
into  the  account,  when  we  would  pronounce  con 
cerning  slavery  in  a  particular  instance.  For 
example,  with  regard  to  the  enslaved — were  they 
free  and  civilized  before  ?  Were  they  capable  of 
self-government?  Then  they  suffer  great  injury. 
Again,  of  the  masters — have  they  used  violence 
in  subjecting  their  fellow-men  to  bondage,  for 
purposes'"  of  gain  or  of  pleasure?  Do  they  use 
their  power  with  cruelty  ?  Then  they  do  great 
wrong.  But  in  this  as  in  all  other  matters  of 
opinion,  we  shall  run  into  great  absurdities,  if  we 
3 


18 

contemplate  a  mere  abstract  question,  without  re 
gard  to  conditions  and  particulars.  For  although 
slavery  from  its  great  liability  to  abuse,  may  be 
the  source  of  the  greatest  evils  that  can  befall  man 
kind,  yet  it  is  very  certain,  that  in  itself  it  may  be 
a  perfectly  natural  and  voluntary  relation,  which 
shall  subsist  to  the  mutual  advantage  of  both  par 
ties.  I  can  very  well  imagine  how  Providence 
may  design  a  blessing  to  a  degraded  people  by 
placing  them  in  bondage  among  a  civilized  com 
munity  ;  not  indeed  with  a  view  to  perpetuity ; 
but  as  a  means  of  receiving  the  elements  of  useful 
knowledge  and  of  morals.  For  they  could  not 
well  receive  such  elements  in  any  other  way.  Is 
the  course  of  discipline  a  severe  one  ?  How  shall 
a  nation  or  an  individual  attain  to  wisdom  and 
virtue  without  severe  schooling?  And  let  it  be 
remembered,  that  the  rigour  of  the  process  and  the 
duration  of  it,  are  in  proportion  to  the  degree  of 
abjectness  from  which  the  resurgation  begins. 

So  far  from  slavery  being  in  itself,  always,  the 
violation  of  all  rights  and  the  consummation  of  all 
wrongs,  I  cannot  conceive  how  a  savage  people 
could  dwell  in  a  civilized  community,  (if  by  any 
means  they  are  brought  thither,)  in  any  other 
relation.  And  knowing  that  they  could  maintain 
no  other,  they  would  not  desire  any  other,  if  good 
will  and  kindness  prevailed  among  the  civilized 
race  in  proportion  to  their  superior  knowledge. 


19 

In  such  case  the  power  of  the  master  would  not 
be  exercised  with  cruelty;  nor  would  the  servi 
tude  be  continued  longer  than  the  condition  of  the 
subject  required  it;  provided  the  relation  could  be 
changed  without  danger  to  either  party.  What 
more  natural?  An  ignorant  barbarian,  thrown  by 
any  means  into  the  society  of  a  civilized  man, 
would  instantaneously  regard  him  as  a  superior ; 
he  would  reverence  him,  he  would  obey  him,  he 
would  delight  to  serve  him.  For  he  would  per 
ceive  how  far  his  enlightened  companion  surpass 
ed  him  in  the  knowledge  of  things,  in  arts  and 
useful  contrivances.  His  own  consciousness  of 
ignorance,  while  it  brought  humility,  would  be 
accompanied  also  by  a  desire  to  learn.  He  would 
be  willing  to  give  whatever  he  had  in  exchange 
for  the  favour  and  the  instruction  of  such  a  supe 
rior.  And  what  would  he  have  to  give  but 
personal  service  1  How  could  the  other  impart 
knowledge  or  deal  with  him  at  all,  except  upon 
condition  of  obedience?  It  is  useless  to  contro 
vert  about  names;  but  there  is  no  denying  that 
the  relation  of  master  and  slave  would  here  subsist 
as  the  most  natural  and  proper  that  could  be.  De 
Foe,  who  is  so  noted  for  his  fidelity  to  nature,  has 
represented  the  savage,  Friday,  prostrating  himself 
before  the  solitary  monarch  of  the  island,  and  by 
putting  the  foot  of  his  master  upon  his  own  neck, 
indicating  more  strongly  than  words  could  have 


20 

done,  that  he  was  his  slave  to  obey  him  in  all 
things.  It  is  to  be  understood  in  all  cases  of  this 
kind,  that  the  savage  has  not  been  for  any  long 
time  under  the  teaching  of  misguided  philanthro 
pists;  otherwise  his  head  being  filled  with  abstract 
doctrines  of  the  rights  of  man  and  of  the  equality 
of  the  species,  he  might  be  disposed  to  regard  his 
superior  as  a  tyrant  or  a  man-stealer,  and  therefore 
become  sullen,  envious,  and  revengeful. 

In  this  view  of  the  subject  there  is  no  difficulty 
in  understanding  the  words  of  Paul,  'Servants,  be 
obedient  to  them  that  are  your  masters  according 
to  the  flesh,  with  fear  and  trembling,  in  singleness 
of  your  hearts,  as  unto  Christ.'  'And  ye,  masters, 
do  the  same  things  unto  them,  forbearing  threaten 
ing;  knowing  that  your  Master  also  is  in  heaven; 
neither  is  there  respect  of  persons  with  him.' 
Ephes.  vi.  5,  9. 

The  evils  of  slavery  are  to  be  found  in  the  abuse 
of  the  ruling  power ;  just  as  a  monarchical  govern 
ment  by  admitting  a  tyrannical  prince,  may  become 
the  source  of  much  misery.  It  affords  occasion 
for  the  exercise  of  injustice ;  for  the  growth  of 
selfish  passions,  which  may  soon  weaken  the 
hold  of  better  feelings  upon  the  heart,  and  may 
tempt  us  to  seek  to  make  a  state  of  things  per 
petual,  which  ought  to  endure  only  for  a  time. 
The  situation  of  a  master,  so  far  from  seeming  a 
thing  to  be  coveted,  does  indeed  bring  with  it 


2i 

relations  of  fearful  responsibility.  For  he  ought 
to  look  upon  himself  somewhat  as  a  guardian  to 
those  whom  Providence  has  placed  under  his 
charge.  But  when  this  responsibility  comes  in 
the  course  of  things,  as  by  inheritance  in  a  com 
munity  where  slavery  exists,  it  is  in  my  judg 
ment,  no  mark  of  magnanimity  for  a  man  to  cast 
off  the  connection  that  binds  him  to  his  slaves  ; 
and  under  pretence  of  giving  them  freedom,  to 
leave  them  without  a  guide  or  protector  in  the 
midst  of  a  society  where  they  can  possess  no 
rights;  where  they  have  few  inducements  to  good 
conduct;  where  they  are  surrounded  by  a  thou 
sand  incentives  to  indolence  and  vice.  The  mat 
ter  becomes  very  different,  of  course,  when  the 
master  may  give  them  freedom,  and  at  the  same 
time  place  them  in  such  a  situation  as  that  their 
freedom  shall  indeed  be  to  them  a  blessing.  Then 
the  act  becomes  noble. 

Let  us  now  corne  to  the  particular  matter  in 
hand,  concerning  the  African  race  who  are  held 
in  bondage  among  us.  Were  they  a  free  civilized 
people  dwelling  in  harmony  under  the  govern 
ment  of  wise  laws,  from  which  condition  of  inde 
pendence  and  happiness  they  have  been  torn  by 
violence,  and  condemned  to  unaccustomed  toil 
and  degradation  in  a  strange  land  1  It  is  proper 
that  we  should  know  something  of  these  particu 
lars.  This  much  is  certain,  that  the  ancestors  of 
3* 


22 

these  negroes  were,  as  the  natives  of  Western 
Africa  are  now,  a  barbarous,  savage  people  ;  sunk 
in  superstition  j  and  given  to  all  manner  of  rude, 
cruel  and  low  customs.  I  presume  it  would  be 
difficult  to  find  upon  the  face  of  the  earth,  a  race 
of  people  more  abjectly  sunk  in  human  imbecility. 
Among  the  African  tribes  as  among  all  savage 
people,  wars  have  been  common ;  the  natural 
state  of  savages  may  almost  be  said  to  be  a  state 
of  war.  In  these  wars  the  invariable  custom  has 
been,  and  still  is,  to  make  slaves  of  those  who  are 
taken  captives.  If  however,  a  tribe  has  slaves 
enough,  and  finds  no  means  of  disposing  of  a  fresh 
accession  of  prisoners,  the  custom  is  to  put  them 
to  death.  I  have  it  from  a  gentleman  who  was 
for  some  time  colonial  agent  in  Liberia,  that  a 
chief  of  a  tribe  in  the  interior  to  whom  he  had 
sent  commissioners  for  some  purpose  or  other, 
having  taken  a  number  of  prisoners  whom  he  had 
no  use  for  as  slaves,  stabbed  them  with  his  own 
hand  in  presence  of  the  commissioners.  When  a 
chief  or  head  man  dies  it  is  usual  to  kill  many 
slaves  at  his  funeral,  in  order  that  he  may  not 
want  attendants  in  the  other  world.  The  num 
ber  of  victims  is  generally  in  proportion  to  the 
dignity  of  the  chief.  When  a  market  was  opened 
by  slave-dealers,  wherein  these  captives  could  be 
disposed  of  at  a  profit,  the  custom  of  putting  them 
to  death  was  no  longer  followed  ;  for  by  such  act 


23 

the  captors  would  be  depriving  themselves  of 
ready  gain. 

Slavery  has  existed  in  Africa.,  as  a  part  of  their 
social  institutions,  for  so  long  a  time  that  no  one 
can  point  out  the  period  when  it  began.  In  1796, 
when  Mungo  Park  visited  the  western  coast,  he 
found  in  the  Gambia  country  that  the  free  class 
of  inhabitants  composed  only  one-fourth  of  the 
population:  'the  other  three -fourths,'  says  this 
traveller,  'are  in  a  state  of  hopeless  and  hereditary 
slavery.  Among  some  tribes,  as  the  Mandingo, 
there  is  some  protection  of  law  to  the  domestic 
slave;  that  is  to  say,  the  master  cannot  put  him 
to  death  or  sell  him  to  a  stranger  without  calling 
a  palaver  on  his  conduct.'  How  far  this  may 
shield  the  slave  from  the  cupidity  or  cruelty  of  the 
master  I  know  not.  'But  this  degree  of  protec 
tion,'  says  the  traveller,  'is  extended  only  to  the 
native  or  domestic  slave ;  captives  taken  in  war, 
those  unfortunate  victims  who  are  condemned  to 
slavery  for  crimes,  or  insolvency,  and  in  short,  all 
those  unhappy  people  who  are  brought  down 
from  the  interior  countries  for  sale,  have  no  secu 
rity  whatever,  but  may  be  treated  and  disposed 
of  in  all  respects  as  the  owner  thinks  proper.'* 

It  will  thus  be  seen  that  the  injury  inflicted 
upon  the  negroes  by  carrying  them  to  a  distant 
country  for  purposes  of  labour  was  indeed  no 

*  Park's  Travels,  ch.  ii. 


24 

injury  at  all.  For  they  were  thus  delivered  from 
a  worse  bondage  at  home ;  or  from  death  itself. 
I  say  from  a  worse  bondage  at  home — for  what 
condition  can  be  worse  than  a  state  of  servitude 
to  a  barbarous  savage,  who  possesses  the  power 
of  inflicting  tortures  and  death  in  any  moment  of 
caprice  or  passion  1 

I  have  not  set  forth  this  view  of  the  subject  for 
the  purpose  of  justifying  the  traffic  in  slaves  which 
has  so  long  been  the  disgrace  of  Christendom  ;  nor 
in  any  manner  to  excuse  slave-traders  who  are 
certainly  impelled  by  no  humane  motives  in  car 
rying  on  their  business;  but  by  motives  entirely- 
selfish  and  abominable.  It  is  proper  however 
that  we  should  be  acquainted  with  all  the  par 
ticulars  which  affect  the  general  question ;  other 
wise  how  shall  we  be  able  to  form  a  rational 
opinion  ?  In  the  consideration  of  this  part  of  the 
subject  we  may  also  find  an  antidote  against  that 
hasty  sort  of  philanthropy,  which,  viewing  things 
only  according  to  outward  appearance,  is  inflamed 
into  a  zeal  without  knowledge ;  which  leads  many 
to  deplore  the  condition  of  a  people  who  are  cer 
tainly  the  gainers  by  their  captivity ;  who  enjoy 
in  their  present  state  more  comforts  than  their 
ancestors  ever  conceived  of;  who  are  in  a  situa 
tion  whereby  they  may  gain  a  knowledge  of  many 
useful  arts,  and  receive  in  some  degree,  the  ele 
ments  of  true  religious  faith.  They  have  been 


25 

delivered  from  a  state  of  life,  the  lowest  that 
human  nature  has  ever  sunk  into  ;  a  condition  of 
society  where  cruelty,  treachery,  revenge,  debas 
ing  superstitions,  and  all  manner  of  abominable 
uncleanness  composed  th«  elements  of  education. 
With  all  the  evils  that  belong  to  their  present  mode 
of  living  in  this  country,  there  is  no  question  but 
it  is  far  superior  to  that  of  their  countrymen  in 
Africa,  who  are  the  slaves  either  of  one  another; 
or  what  is  equally  bad,  the  slaves  of  their  own 
vices  and  superstitions. 

It  is  natural  for  persons  of  quick  sensibilities, 
when  their  minds  are  awakened  to  a  perception  of 
wrongs  in  which  they  have  been  concerned,  whe 
ther  innocently  or  not,  it  is  natural  I  say  for  such  to 
feel  a  strong  desire  to  make  immediate  compensa 
tion  ;  under  the  influence  of  which  feeling,  they  are 
often  hurried  into  hasty  and  inconsiderate  actions 
which  frequently  bring  great  evils  upon  them 
selves,  with  but  little  good  to  the  objects  of  their 
solicitude.  Such  a  feeling  is  akin  to  that  which 
prompted  pious  ascetics  of  old,  to  lacerate  their 
bodies,  and  to  endure  many  distressing  penances, 
to  atone  for  sins,  which  their  imaginations,  under 
the  excitement  of  sudden  remorse,  had  conjured 
into  horrible  forms.  A  state  of  mind  like  this  is 
certainly  ill  adapted  for  purposes  of  real  and  useful 
benevolence  ;  yet  such,  I  apprehend  is  the  feeling 


26 

among  many  who  are  advocates  of  the  immediate 
abolition  of  slavery  in  this  country. 

What  then?     Because  in  the  order  of  Provi 
dence  a  state  of  servitude  may  become  the  means 
of  ultimate  good  to  the  enslaved,  and  in  certain 
contingencies  such  condition  may  be  natural  and 
proper;  because  the  negroes  whom  we  hold  in. 
bondage  have  not  suffered  those  injuries   which 
many  at  first  view  are  apt  to  suppose,  but  are  in 
reality  the  better  for  their  captivity,  does  it  follow 
from  all  this  that  we  are  to  remain  at  ease  and  do 
nothing  for  their  deliverance?     Nay,    rather  on 
the  other  hand  we  ought  to  see  that  the  final  issue 
for  good  depends  upon  our  action  to  this  very  end. 
To  keep  them  in  servitude  perpetually  is  to  defeat 
the  real  purpose  for  which  such  servitude  may  be 
to  them  a  blessing.     If  no  injury  has  hitherto 
been  done  them,  we  begin  a  course  of  injury  by 
neglecting  to  seek  some  rational  means  of  restor 
ing  them  to  wholesome  freedom  in  such  manner, 
as  that  the  change  may  be  effected  gradually  and 
with  safety  to  both  master  and  slave.     They  may 
not  be  conscious  of  having  suffered  wrong;  they 
may  not  now  feel  that  any  rights  are  withheld; 
but  does  that  remove  from  us  the  obligation  to  do 
justice?     If  by  accidental  means  I  come  into  pos 
session  of  another's  property,  which  he  does  not 
know  to  be  his  own,  yet  for  the  want  of  which  he 
may  be  suffering,  can  I  lawfully  retain  possession 


27 

of  it?  Yet  if  this  person  be  a  minor,  to  whom  I 
am  guardian,  he  being  incapable  of  making  a 
proper  use  of  his  inheritance,  it  is  hardly  my  duty 
in  view  of  clearing  conscience,  to  entrust  him 
with  that,  which,  though  lawf'ully  his  own  when 
ever  he  shall  be  in  a  fit  condition  to  use  it,  may 
at  present  becomes  the  means  of  his  ruin;  which, 
will  cause  him  to  be  exposed  to  a  thousand  dan 
gers,  not  only  from  the  dishonesty  of  knaves,  but 
also  by  reason  of  his  own  ignorance  and  want  of 
experience.  In  the  proper  blending  of  these  two 
duties,  viz :  that  of  restoring  and  that  of  withhold 
ing  will  be  found  occasion  for  the  exercise  of 
genuine  benevolence,  tempered  with  discretion, 
which  is  the  wholesome  condition  of  both;  for 
neither  should  act  alone. 

It  may  be  asked  how  shall  it  be  known  when 
the  state  of  servitude  becomes  no  longer  proper,  if 
there  be  conditions  which  make  it  so  at  all;  as  I 
have  supposed  there  are.  To  this  the  answer 
seems  to  be ;  when  the  evils  of  the  relation  become 
apparent.  It  is  in  this  way  that  we  are  taught  to 
change  any  course  of  conduct  which  we  had  been 
in  the  habit  of  pursuing  with  seeming  safety 
before.  The  perception  of  these  evils  makes  it 
evident  that  something  is  wrong;  it  then  becomes 
the  part  of  conscience,  enlightened  by  reason,  to 
discover  wherein  is  the  error ;  and  to  suggest  and 
to  provide  the  means  of  its  removal.  But  it 


28 

belongs  to  those  only,  who  are  concerned — that  is 
to  the  community  wherein  slavery  exists,  to  choose 
the  time  of  action  as  well  as  the  mode.  It  is  their 
.  own  business,  in  which  no  other  has  a  right  to 
interfere.  For  as  the  responsibility  rests  upon 
them;  as  the  consequences  of  their  doings  must 
be  theirs,  it  would  be  impertinent  and  wicked  to 
intrude  upon  the  limits  of  their  moral  freedom. 
Whatever  advices  are  offered  from  abroad,  should 
seek  admittance  only  through  the  medium  of  a 
spirit  of  sympathy,  made  up  of  kindred  feelings 
and  of  sincere  good- will;  they  should  claim  influ 
ence  only,  as  they  are  received  with  willingness  j 
and  none  are  the  legitimate  judges  of  their  appli 
cability,  save  those  whose  duty  it  is  to  act. 

The  substance  of  what  I  have  been  discoursing 
about  may  be  briefly  set  forth  thus: 

First  concerning  Rights :  That  they  are  not 
inherent  and  absolute ;  otherwise  the  rights  of  a 
man  and  of  a  child  would  be  the  same ;  but  they 
are  relative  and  depend  upon  duties.  In  propor 
tion  as  a  man  improves  his  powers  for  purposes 
of  good  in  their  legitimate  order,  in  such  propor 
tion  do  his  rights  increase.  These  rights  follow 
of  necessity  as  natural  consequences;  although  it 
may  often  happen  that  the  brutal  part  of  human 
nature,  operating  by  force,  may  overpower  the 
inward  voice  of  right.  From  this  it  follows  that  if 
rights  may  be  acquired  by  virtuous  labour,  so  also 


29 

may  they  be  lost  by  indolence  and  vice.  When  a 
man  becomes  incapable  of  using  a  right,  it  is  in 
reality  no  longer  his.  A  man  of  full  growth  and 
sound  constitution  has  a  right  to  marry ;  a  child 
has  no  such  right;  nor  will  the  man  continue  to 
possess  it,  if  he  pursues  evil  courses  to  the  ener 
vating  of  his  body.  An  intelligent  man  of  good 
moral  principles  has  a  right  to  freedom  of  action  ; 
a  madman  has  no  such  right ;  nor  the  confirmed 
desperado,  who  has  shown  himself  incapable  of 
respecting  law.  A  nation  of  virtuous  and  enlight 
ened  people  have  a  right  to  a  free  constitution ; 
an  ignorant  or  a  corrupt  people  have  not.  These 
latter,  unable  to  govern  themselves,  require  the 
strong  rule  of  a  single  man.  Under  a  republican 
form  they  would  be  employed  in  cutting  each 
other's  throats. 

The  power  of  using  a  right  worthily  is  blended 
with  an  instinct  that  prompts  to  its  exercise. 

The  consciousness  of  wanting  the  power  of 
using  a  right  properly  causes  one  to  know  that  he 
has  no  just  claim  to  it.  A  servile  people  do  not 
desire  freedom. 

These  two  remarks  however  are  to  be  taken 
with  limitations.  The  sense  of  inward  power 
pervading  a  vast  multitude  is  often  in  its  concep 
tion  indistinct ;  it  excites  enthusiasm  which  drives 
to  excess.  Time  and  experience  are  required 
before  men  can  know  themselves.  Again,  a  cor- 
4 


so 

rupt  people  often  cleave  to  a  republican  form  of 
government  and  preserve  the  outward  appearances 
of  being  their  own  rulers ;  but  it  is  only  until  they 
are  fully  convinced  of  their  incapacity.  Roman 
self-government  was  no  more,  after  the  domina 
tion  of  Sylla ;  the  form  of  the  republic  remained 
for  some  time  later ;  nay  the  consular  office  was 
continued,  and  also  the  shadow  of  a  senate  for 
many  years  under  the  emperors. 

Secondly  concerning  slavery  :  Is  political  sla 
very  right,  such  for  example  as  that  of  the  Turks  ? 
Who  shall  say  that  it  is  right,  in  view  of  the  ca 
pacities  and  duties  of  man?  Is  it  wrong?  Who 
shall  say  that  it  is  wrong,  in  view  of  the  character 
of  the  people  who  could  perhaps  live  under  no 
other  kind  of  government!  If  it  is  wished  to 
change  outward  relations,  you  must  first  change 
the  inward  disposition ;  to  improve  a  form  of 
government  you  must  first  improve  the  character 
of  the  people. 

Is  personal  slavery  right  ?  What,  as  a  part  of 
national  institutions  intended  for  permanence  ? 
Certainly  not.  Has  one  man  a  right  of  property 
over  another  ?  What,  as  an  article  of  merchan 
dise,  to  be  bought  and  sold  merely?  By  no  means. 

Slavery  becomes  proper  only  by  reason  of  con 
ditions.  A  people  ignorant  and  docile ;  uncivi 
lized,  yet  accustomed  to  labour,  dwelling  in  a 
community  of  enlightened  men,  from  whom  they 


31 

are  distinct  in  race,  cannot  well  hold  any  other 
relation  than  that  of  servitude.  Shall  the  superior 
class  degrade  themselves  for  the  purpose  of  more 
easy  association?  This  relation  becomes  still  more 
necessary,  when  the  inferior  race  has  been  for 
innumerable  generations  inured  to  slavery,  inso 
much  that  a  servile  spirit  is  their  chief  characte 
ristic.  But  this  relation  being,  under  such  condi 
tions,  proper,  there  is  no  justification  afforded 
thereby  to  the  imposition  of  unusual  labour;  to 
cruelty,  or  to  capricious  tyranny  of  any  kind;  nor 
to  the  indulgence  of  selfish  cupidity.  For  the  laws 
of  reason  and  of  right  are  ever  binding ;  nor  is 
there  any  condition  of  things  which  may  release  a 
man  from  the  Christian  obligation  of  doing  as  he 
would  be  done  unto. 


CHAPTER    II. 


I  PROCEED  now  to  consider  the  modes  which 
have  been  recommended  of  delivering  the  country 
from  the  evils  of  slavery.  The  first  which  I  shall 
allude  to  is  that  which  is  urged  with  much 
warmth  by  many  persons  at  the  north,  who  are 
known  by  the  name  of  Abolitionists. 

The  chief  purposes  of  the  Abolition  society  are 
stated  in  two  propositions.  I  quote  from  Jay's 
Inquiry,  which  is  orthodox,  I  believe,  with  the 
friends  of  this  measure. 

1 .  'The  immediate  abolition  of  slavery  through 
out  the  United  States.' 

2.  'The  ultimate  elevation  of  the  black  popu 
lation  to  an  equality  with  the  white  in  civil  and 
religious  privileges.'* 

I  shall  not  now  stop  to  consider  by  what  means 
the  advocates  of  this  scheme  propose  to  accomplish 
their  purposes.  Let  us  suppose  them  to  be  effect- 

*  Jay's  Inquiry,  p.  141. 


33 

ed ;  and  let  us  consider  what  might  be  expected 
from  such  a  consummation  in  some  one  of  the 
cotton-growing  states  of  the  south,  where  the 
whites  and  blacks  are  nearly  equal  in  numerical 
proportion.  Let  it  be  remembered  also  that  amal 
gamation  by  intermarriages  is  allowed  on  all  sides 
to  be  a  thing  wholly  impracticable;  for  we  have 
the  assurance  of  Mr.  Jay  that  the  abolitionists  are 
the  advocates  of  no  such  odious  measure.  'One 
of  the  designs,'  says  this  writer,  'falsely  imputed 
to  them  (the  abolitionists)  is  that  of  bringing  about 
an  amalgamation  of  colours  by  intermarriages. 
In  vain  have  they  again  and  again  denied  any 
such  design ;  in  vain  have  their  writings  been 
searched  for  any  recommendation  of  such  amal 
gamation.'* 

Here  then  we  have  dwelling  in  the  same  com 
munity  two  distinct  races  of  men,  totally  different, 
the  one  from  the  other,  in  colour,  in  modes  of  life, 
in  modes  of  thinking  and  of  feeling  :  and  the  one 
far  superior  to  the  other  in  knowledge,  in  art,  in 
refinement,  in  properly,  in  every  thing  that  per 
tains  to  civilization.  It  is  expected  of  these  two 
different  sorts  of  people,  that  they  will  unite  toge 
ther  harmoniously  in  administering  the  public 
affairs  ;  that  they  will  compose  parts  of  the  same 
body  politic ;  in  a  word  that  they  will  dwell  toge 
ther  as  one  people. 

*  Jay's  Inquiry,  p.  147. 


34 

I  leave  all  other  parts  of  the  subject,  my  dear 
sir,  to  come  in  as  they  may,  with  a  view  of  setting 
forth  singly  and  with  clearness,  this  proposition, 
viz.  That  two  distinct  races  of  people,  nearly 
equal  in  numbers,  and  unlike  in  colour,  manners, 
habits,  feelings  and  state  of  civilization,  to  such  a 
degree  that  amalgamation  is  impossible,  cannot 
dwell  together  in  the  same  community,  unless  the 
one  be  in  subjection  to  the  other. 

I  care  not  to  inquire  by  what  process  the  friends 
of  immediate  emancipation  propose  to  have  the 
coloured  population  brought  into  a  full  possession 
of  civil  privileges ;  whether  immediate  or  gradual. 
The  consummation  in  either  case  is  the  same. 
The  means  by  which  they  are  attempting  to  gain 
their  end  will  also  be  passed  by,  for  the  present. 
The  impolicy  and  dangerous  tendency  of  their 
measures  will  be  most  clearly  seen  by  considering 
the  issue  to  which  they  must  come. 

In  every  state  which  acknowledges  one  consti 
tution  there  must  be  a  certain  common  interest 
whereby  it  is  bound  together  :  from  which  will 
follow  a  harmony  of  parts,  and  a  common  feeling 
of  sympathy.  This  is  necessary  to  give  unity  to 
a  state,  and  to  constitute  it  individual. 

From  these  considerations  come  two  principles, 
which  are  equally  evident  and  necessary.  First, 
with  regard  to  the  sovereign  will  of  the  state  which 
expresses  itself  in  the  form  of  laws,  it  is  plain  that 


35 

this  must  be  one.   It  may  have  for  its  agent  an  elec 
tive  officer  whose  duties  are  defined,  and  blended 
with  those  of  other  agents,  or  a  king,  or  a  senate, 
or  any  other  depository.     It  may  itself  be  called 
the  soul  of  the  state,  whereof  the  body  may  have 
one  form  or  another.    It  is  essential  to  this  supreme 
will  or  power,  that  it  be  one.     If  there  be  a  rival 
power  in  the  nation  which  is  not  subordinate, 
then  there  can  be  no  harmony  until  the  question 
of  supremacy  is  settled.     Hence  the  early  history 
of   England,   not  to    mention   other    nations   of 
Europe,  is  filled  with  details  of  the  many  strifes 
between  the  throne  and  the  church.     For  it  was 
contended  by  the  clergy  that  they  were  not  ame 
nable  to  the  civil  laws  of  the  nation  ;  they  claimed 
not  only   to  be   exclusively    under  ecclesiastical 
jurisdiction   themselves,  but  also  maintained  the 
supremacy  of  the  pope  in  all  matters  both  secular 
and  spiritual.     This  contest  was  the  fruitful  source 
of  dissensions  until  the  question  was  finally  deter 
mined. 

The  governing  power  must  not  only  be  supreme, 
every  other  power  being  subordinate,  but  there 
can  be  no  security  unless  it  has  also  a  sense  of 
permanence.  Thus,  when  Ferdinand  of  Spain 
subdued  the  Moors,  yet  was  not  the  nation  at 
ease,  until  the  whole  body  of  the  Moorish  people 
were  exiled  from  the  Spanish  soil.  For  although 
this  race  were  in  a  state  of  temporary  subjection, 


36 

yet  remaining  distinct  with  all  their  national  pecu 
liarities,  which  were  in  every  respect  foreign  from 
the  genius  of  the  Spanish  people,  there  could  exist 
between  them  no  confidence  or  sympathy.  Per 
petual  care  and  vigilance  would  be  required  to 
watch  them ;  every  disturbance  in  the  state  might 
afford  them  an  opportunity  of  rising  in  rebellion  ; 
and  in  a  word,  neither  peace  nor  security  could 
be  enjoyed  so  long  as  they  remained  in  the  king 
dom.  Hence  the  necessity  of  a  measure  which 
may  at  first  sight  appear  cruel. 

The  same  principle  is  manifested  sometimes  in 
the  histories  of  separate  states,  as  in  the  case  of 
Rome  and  Carthage.  Both  powerful,  and  ani 
mated  by  feelings  of  mutual  hostility,  for  being  so 
totally  different  in  character  and  pursuits,  there 
could  be  little  cordiality  between  them,  the  one 
was  continually  in  dread  of  the  other,  and  feared 
to  undertake  any  great  business  which  might 
require  all  the  energies  of  the  state,  lest  the  occa 
sion  would  be  seized  upon  by  their  enemy  for 
commencing  hostilities.  In  this  view  the  saying 
of  CatOj  Delenda  est  Carthago,  may  contain  some 
sound  policy,  as  well  as  much  of  the  barbarous 
spirit  of  the  age. 

Secondly, — There  must  be  in  every  well-consti 
tuted  state  a  certain  homogeneousness  of  parts. 
Not  only  is  it  necessary  that  the  governing  power 
be  supreme,  and  free  from  any  dread  of  subver- 


37 

sionj  but  the  several  members  also  of  the  body 
politic  must  be  in  harmony,  both  among  them 
selves  and  with  the  governing  power  likewise. 
According  as  the  constitution  of  a  country  is  fixed, 
the  various  subordinate  departments  of  all  grades, 
each  after  its  kind,  may  be  considered  as  the  reci 
pients  and  dispensers  of  the  supreme  will,  even  as 
the  various  limbs  and  organs  of  the  body  are  reci 
pients  and  dispensers  of  the  life  of  a  man.  Or  as 
the  sap  of  a  tree  rises  from  the  roots,  and  ascend 
ing  to  the  top,  is  returned  again  downwards,  dif 
fusing  itself  throughout  the  various  vessels  and 
tubes,  imparting  nourishment  to  every  branch  and 
spray ;  so  the  vis  vitce  of  the  state  performs  a  like 
course,  whereby  one  common  spirit  pervades  the 
entire  community.  But  this  healthful  circulation 
cannot  go  on  if  it  so  happen  that  some  members 
are  unfit  recipients  of  this  influence  j  obstructions 
take  place,  and  a  general  derangement  follows 
through  the  whole  system.  Or,  to  take  another 
illustration  from  nature.  It  is  well  known  that 
crystalization,  whereby  many  particles  are  joined 
together  to  form  one  body,  can  be  effected  only 
when  the  elements  are  homogeneous. 

The  idea  of  force  is  repugnant  to  that  of  a  well- 
ordered  state.  I  speak  not  of  that  kind  of  force 
which  is  sometimes  necessary  to  repel  foreign 
aggression,  and  which  ought  therefore  to  be  well 
provided  for.  But  in  the  internal  administration 
of  its  own  affairs  obedience  is  expected  to  follow 


38 

implicitly  the  dictates  of  the  governing  will,  when 
the  same  is  expressed  in  the  form  of  law.  If  this 
power,  in  its  diffusion  throughout  the  divers  rami 
fications  of  the  political  system  meets  with  obstruc 
tions,  force  then  arises  to  remove  the  impediment. 
This  being  done  force  subsides.  It  is  manifest 
therefore  that  all  the  parts  of  the  body  politic  must 
be  in  harmony.  The  elements  of  this  are  found 
in  many  things:  such  as  a  common  language, 
common  interests,  geographical  situation,  with 
facility  of  mutual  intercourse,  intermarriages,  with 
their  corresponding  relationships ;  to  which  may 
be  added  a  common  religion  and  identity  of  blood. 
It  may  indeed  happen  that  a  foreign  people  may 
be  incorporated  with  a  community  already  estab 
lished,  as  will  be  noticed  more  fully  hereafter; 
just  as  a  strange  shoot  may  be  engrafted  upon  a 
tree.  But  as  in  the  latter  case,  the  sap  of  the 
parent  stock  must  pass  freely  into  the  new  bough, 
and  thus  assimilate  it  with  itself;  so  in  the  other, 
the  new  class  of  people  must  be  adapted  to  receive 
the  spirit,  that  is  to  say,  the  laws,  manners  and 
general  feeling  of  the  nation  with  which  they  are 
united.  In  other  words  there  must  be  a  mutual 
blending  and  amalgamation  whereby  the  two  may 
become  one  people.  But  this  latter  consumma 
tion  is  not  recognized  in  the  proposition  which  we 
are  considering. 

A  foreign  mass  in  the  midst  of  a  society  with 


39 

which  it  cannot  assimilate  is  as  a  dead  member, 
hrough  which  the  life  blood  of  the  body  social 
does  not  circulate  ;  if  inactive  it  becomes  the  seat 
of  putrescence  and  gangrene  which  will  shortly 
spread  throughout  the  whole  system,  unless  re 
course  be  had  to  amputation.  But  in  a  commu 
nity  where  this  heterogeneous  part  is  active,  being 
quickened  by  motives  and  interests  of  its  own,  the 
disorder  becomes  ten-fold  worse.  It  has  no  em 
blem,  unless  we  imagine  the  body  of  a  man  pos 
sessed  at  once  by  two  discordant  spirits. 

During  the  middle  ages,  the  Jews  were  subjects 
of  persecution  in  most  of  the  Christian  nations  of 
Europe.  By  a  decree  of  Ferdinand  of  Spain  they 
were  expelled  from  that  kingdom  at  once,  to  the 
number  of  one  hundred  and  fifty  thousand.  Under 
the  reign  of  Philip  the  Long,  they  were  driven 
from  France,  being  accused  of  having  poisoned  the 
springs  with  their  lepers.  At  the  coronation  of 
Richard  I.  a  general  massacre  of  the  Jews  broke 
out  in  London  which  extended  to  York  and  other 
cities.  The  pretexts  for  these  outrages  were  va 
rious.  Heresy  was  a  standing  charge  j  they  were 
also  accused  of  monopolizing  trade ;  of  exacting 
usury,  to  say  nothing  of  other  accusations.  But 
the  Jews  lived  to  themselves,  apart  from  the  rest 
of  the  community,  with  whom  they  did  not  min 
gle  in  marriage  ;  they  were  a  separate  people ;  they 
sympathized  not  in  the  general  feelings.  When 


40 

distrust  and  aversion  were  thus  excited  and  kept 
alive,  a  pretext  for  giving  vent  to  them  would  not 
long  be  wanting. 

There  is  another  view  in  which  it  may  be  seen 
how  impossible  it  is  for  two  several  races  of  peo 
ple  to  live  together  in  peace  under  one  govern 
ment,  each  being  distinct  from  the  other,  yet 
both  participating  equally  in  the  administration. 
The  constitution  of  laws  by  which  a  people  are 
governed,  is  adapted  to  their  particular  condition ; 
it  is  indeed  the  natural  offspring  of  their  wants, 
their  feelings,  their  habits  of  thought  and  pursuits ; 
and  bears  in  every  feature  the  impress  of  the 
national  genius.  As  a  nation  gradually  changes 
so  also  its  constitution  is  modified  to  suit ;  a  more 
refined  age  discards  much  that  belonged  to  a  for 
mer  more  barbarous  period,  and  adopts  new  insti 
tutions  which  correspond  better  with  the  present. 
How  different,  for  example,  is  the  English  consti 
tution  from  that  which  prevailed  three  centuries 
ago! 

It  will  follow  from  this  that  any  particular  sys 
tem  of  government  can  suit  only  that  people  for 
whose  uses  and  convenience  it  was  framed.  A 
community  of  Englishmen  would  find  a  French 
system  of  laws  and  manners  very  ill-adapted  to 
their  comfort;  and  so  vice  versa.  As  there  are 
in  the  language  of  a  people  certain  idioms  and 
forms  of  speech  which  are  peculiar  and  which 


41 

cannot  be  translated  into  another  tongue,  although 
the  general  principles  of  language  are  every  where 
the  same ;  so  while  the  great  maxims  of  policy 
and  government  are  universally  acknowledged  by 
all  civilized  nations  as  the  same  in  all  countries 
alike,  there  are  nevertheless  certain  characteristic 
peculiarities  which  distinguish  individual  states 
from  all  others;  and  are  so  intimately  blended 
with  the  spirit  and  genius  of  the  people  as  to  be 
inseparable  therefrom.  A  more  excellent  illus 
tration  of  the  same  thing  is  contained  in  Lord 
Bacon's  simile,  'like  as  waters  do  take  tinctures 
and  tastes  from  the  soils  through  which  they  run, 
so  do  civil  laws  vary  according  to  the  regions  and 
governments  where  they  are  planted  ;  though  they 
proceed  from  the  same  fountain.'  In  view  of  this 
truth  how  were  it  possible  that  two  distinct  nations, 
each  possessing  its  idiomatic  peculiarities,  could 
live  together  under  a  political  system  which  suits 
only  one  of  them?  How  greatly  is  the  absurdity 
of  such  a  supposition  heightened,  when  it  is 
known  that  the  one  nation  is  composed  of  whites, 
the  other  of  blacks;  that  the  one  is  highly  civilized, 
refined,  and  wealthy ;  the  other  lately  delivered 
from  slavery,  imbued  with  a  servile  spirit,  igno 
rant,  coarse,  and  destitute  of  substance. 

This  same  truth  is  illustrated  by  the  revolutions 
which  sometimes  take  place  in  a  nation.     The 
government  being  established  to  suit  the  general 
R 


42 

interest  at  an  early  period,  becomes  ill  adapted  to 
the  same  end,  when  after  the  lapse  of  some  ages, 
a  gradual  change  has  passed  upon  the  pursuits, 
manners  and  character  of  the  state.  Yet  the  con 
stitution  was  established  with  a  view  to  stability ; 
large  interests,  a  whole  aristocracy,  for  example, 
or  the  monarchy  itself  are  opposed  to  a  change ; 
the  system  suits  their  wants  and  wishes  as  well  as 
it  ever  did  j  for  at  the  time  of  its  establishment, 
these  were  the  only  prominent  interests  in  the 
nation,,  the  people  being  in  a  state  of  vassalage. 
But  by  the  gradual  weakening  of  the  aristocratical 
or  monarchical  power ;  by  the  introduction  of 
trade;  by  the  more  general  distribution  of  landed 
property,  the  people  have  become  powerful.  The 
government  having  been  framed  without  a  view 
to  their  good,  is  unsuited  to  their  wants;  hence 
comes  a  struggle  between  the  expansive  and  the 
conservative  powers  of  the  commonwealth.  This 
may  be  seen  exemplified  in  the  history  of  England 
in  all  the  gradual  changes  which  were  made  in 
the  constitution,  from  the  time  of  Magna  Charta 
up  to  the  revolution  of  '68,  and  even  since  that 
period.  Just  before  the  civil  wars  of  Cromwell's 
time,  the  royal  prerogative  had  been  carried  to  its 
greatest  height  by  James  I.  whose  favourite  maxim 
was,  that  kings  held  by  a  divine  right ;  and  that 
all  liberty  to  the  people  must  come  to  them  as  a 
gift  from  the  throne  of  majesty.  By  this  full 


43 

development  of  the  crown's  pretensions,  the  peo 
ple  saw  clearly  that  there  was  no  security  for 
their  own  rights  and  liberties;  that  they  had  no 
part  in  the  political  fabric;    that  there  was  no 
unison  between  their  interests  and  the  constitu 
tion  under  which  they  lived.      This  perception 
being  accompanied  by  a  consciousness  of  strength, 
prompted  to  a  speedy  determination  of  a  matter 
which  could  not  be  suffered  to  remain  in  doubt. 
Hence  it  is  apparent  that  for  every  great  interest 
ia  a  commufiity,  there  must  be  a  corresponding 
provision  adapted  thereunto  in  the  laws  of  the 
land.     The  constitution  must  be  in  harmony  with 
the  people;   it  must  be  the  natural  offspring  of 
their  wants,  their  feelings,  their  habits.    Thus  the 
different  members  of  the  state  are  required  also  to 
be  bound  together  by  a  general  sympathy,  subsist 
ing  mutually  between  each  aed  all;  so  that  the 
provisions  which  are  made  for  the  security  and 
happiness  of  one  part,  may  not  be  opposed  to  the 
wants  and  interests  of  another.      In   a  homoge 
neous  community,  this  general  harmony  will  be 
the  test  of  the  excellence  of  the  government;  for 
therein  the  interests  of  one  part,  so  far  from  clash 
ing,  will  altogether  coincide  with  the  interests  of 
all,  and  will  tend  to  promote  the  same. 

But  how  different  the  case  when  one-half  of  the 
community  is  directly  antagonist  to  the  other! 
When  the  laws  and  institutions  which  correspond 


44 

with  the  intelligence,  the  refinement,  the  wealth 
and  industry  of  the  one  class,  cannot  so  much  as 
be  understood  by  the  inferior  division,  which  is 
wanting  in  all  that  distinguishes  the  other  ! 

When  one  class  of  a  community  is  in  subjection 
to  the  other,  provided,  that  it  be  not  a  subjection 
brought  about  by  mere  brute  force,  but  founded  on 
the  natural  subordination  of  the  weak  and  ignorant 
to  the  more  powerful  and  civilized,  there  may 
then  exist  a  state  of  perfect  harmony.  For  the 
enslaved  will  then  have  no  part  in  the  administra 
tion  of  affairs;  nor  will  they  desire  any,  being 
conscious  of  their  own  incapability  of  even  under 
standing,  much  less  of  managing  such  great  mat 
ters.  The  benefits  of  good  government  will  come 
to  them  through  the  medium  of  their  superiors ; 
and  partaking  of  its  blessings  in  such  way,  they 
will  look  no  farther  than  to  their  own  masters  for 
the  source  of  their  enjoyments.  When  the  seve 
rity  of  rule  is  tempered  with  kindness,  as  I  have 
witnessed  in  instances  without  number,  there 
springs  up  between  master  and  slave,  a  domestic 
sympathy,  which  is  the  kindly  foster  mother  of 
many  good  affections.  The  children  of  the  family 
are  nursed  by  faithful  and  affectionate  slaves; 
their  childish  sports  are  with  those  of  like  age 
though  of  different  colour ;  yet  what  does  child 
hood  know  or  care  of  differences  in  complexion  1 
The  feelings  of  deep  attachment  formed  thus  early 


45 

~m  life,  if  they  be  not  afterwards  broken  by  harsh 
treatment,  with  what  intensity  do  they  cleave  to 
the  heart  of  the  negro  ?     I  have  seen  the  manly 
character  of  the  master  reflected  in  the  demeanour 
of  the  slave ;  the  same  sort  of  self-respect  which 
made  a  gentleman  of  the  one,  served  also  to  mould 
the  other  into  a  faithful  domestic.     The  negroes 
are  proud  of  their  master's  worth ;  they  delight 
to  bear  his  name,  and  scorn  to  disgrace  it.     To 
me   it  appears  that  a  condition  of  servitude  in 
which  such  feelings   are   nurtured  may  be   the 
happiest  of  all  means  whereby  a  degraded  people 
may  be  raised  into  a  better  state.     There  must  be 
a  tedious  process  undergone,  and  one  full  of  trou 
bles,  before  unenlightened  man  can  be  made  fit  to 
receive   with   safety,   the   dreadful   yet    precious 
responsibility  of  his  own  self-government.    A  bar 
barous  people,  among  whom  a  spirit  of  self-reno 
vation   is   yet   active,  such  for  example  as  the 
English  were  at  the  period  of  the  Norman  con 
quest,  through  what  scenes  of  confusion,  and  strife, 
and  violence,  and  bloodshed,  must  they  pass  in 
their  painful   progress  towards  this  great  fulfil 
ment  !      With  what  fearful,   doubting  hesitation 
are  the  first  steps  made!     How  timidly  does  the 
young  germ  unfold  !     The  spirit  of  liberty,  which 
is  but  another  name  for  the  spirit  of  truth,  moving 
amid  the  troubled  chaos,  impregnates  the  general 
soul,  and  transfuses  itself  into  the  embryo  ele- 
5* 


46 

ments  of  human  thought  and  feeling.  How  gra 
dually  the  hidden  conception  wakens  into  life ! 
With  what  terrible  struggles,  with  what  partu 
rient  throes  is  it  ushered  into  being!  Yet  the 
vivacious  chrysalis  has  scarcely  burst  the  bands  of 
one  womb,  ere  it  finds  itself  enclosed  in  another, 
yet  possessed  of  new  vigour  to  enlarge  still  farther 
the  barriers  of  its  prison.  Let  the  history  of  any 
nation  be  traced,  that  has  arrived  at  anything 
like  freedom,  and  it  will  be  seen  how  great  a  mat 
ter  it  is  to  govern  one's-self  in  liberty.  How  many 
have  sunk  in  their  efforts,  after  having  attained 
just  enough  to  give  freedom  to  pride  and  self- 
conceit! 

The  Israelitish  nation,  when  they  were  deliver 
ed  from  the  bondage  of  the  Egyptians,  had  doubt 
less  amid  all  the  degradation  of  recent  servitude, 
many  elements  of  moral  resuscitation.  They  could 
remember  that  Abraham  was  their  ancestor  ;  that 
Joseph,  of  their  own  family,  had  been  ruler  over 
Egypt.  They  had  doubtless  preserved  in  their 
usages  and  traditions  the  memory  of  many  sub 
lime  truths,  which  their  forefathers  had  received 
by  communications  with  heavenly  intelligence. 
Yet  a  pilgrimage  of  forty  years,  full  of  sufferings, 
was  deemed  proper  to  be  undergone  by  them, 
before  they  were  to  be  entrusted  with  their  own 
destiny ;  to  say  nothing  of  the  wonderful  revela 
tions  that  were  made  to  them,  of  truths  from 


47 

heaven,  and  of  the  many  evidences  that  were 
given  them  of  the  divine  favour.  With  all  these 
helps  they  were  driven  afterwards,  by  the  con 
sequences  of  misrule,  to  solicit  a  king ;  nay,  a 
second  captivity  in  Babylon  was  found  useful 
towards  preparing  them  to  govern  themselves. 
If  the  relation  of  master  and  slave  were  done 
away  in  this  country,  all  those  kindly  feelings 
which  now  soften  its  asperity,  would  perish 
along  with  it ;  those  domestic  ties,  those  house 
hold  sympathies  which  twine  the  closest  of  all 
affections  around  the  human  heart;  which  when 
torn  away  by  violence,  each  ruptured  tendril,  like 
the  shoots  that  were  plucked  from  the  tomb  of 
Polydorus,  seems  to  give  forth  blood  : 

Quae  prima  solo  ruptis  radicibus  arbos 
Vellitur,  huic  atro  liquuntur  sanguine  guttse. 

In  place  of  these,  what  would  grow  up  but  feel 
ings  of  aversion,  of  suspicion,  of  jealousy  ?  By 
what  means  is  it  supposed  that  the  unfortunate 
class  of  emancipated  captives,  (emancipated  only 
in  name,)  could  work  out  their  own  reformation 
in  a  situation  such  as  they  would  find  themselves 
occupying?  Are  men  to  be  made  new  crea 
tures  by  act  of  legislature  ?  Can  the  moral  and 
intellectual  man,  the  only  real  man,  emerge  at 
once  from  the  thraldom  of  hereditary  and  habitual 
vices,  into  the  freedom  of  truth  and  of  moral  self- 
government?  Or  can  human  wishes  change  the 


48 

established  order  of  heaven's  decree,  and  of  man's 
constitution,   whereby  his  deliverance   from   the 
dominion  of  error  and  of  evil  is  to  be  wrought 
only  by  means  of  sufferings  which  himself  must 
undergo  ?     Can  this  be  altered,  and  a  different 
mode  be  devised,  less  painful  and  more  speedy  ? 
Is   it  likely  indeed  in   the  ordinary  course  of 
human  actions,  that  a  special  scheme  of  legislation 
would  or  ought  to  be  shaped  for  the  particular 
purpose  of  elevating  these   people  as  a  distinct 
class  among  us,  when  it  is  apparent  that  every 
step  they  make  towards  the  possession  of  rights 
will  be  but  the  hastening  of  the  period  when  mor 
tal  conflict  must  come  to  decide  the  question  of 
supremacy  between  them  and  their  former  mas 
ters  ?     For  it  must  be  remembered,  that  amalga 
mation  of  colours  is  a  thing  not  to  be  thought  of 
as  an  actual  event ;  but  that  if  the  blacks  are  to  be 
elevated,  they  must  be  elevated  as  a  race,  distinct 
and   separate.     Let   any   one,   who  is   sincerely 
their  friend,  consider  but  for  a  time,  the  condition 
in  which  they   would  be  placed  by  an  act   of 
general  emancipation.      I  leave  out  of  view  all 
thoughts  of  ultimate  danger  to  both  races,  and 
direct  attention  solely  to  their  unfortunate  lot — for 
such  it  would  be.     Who  does  not  see  that  their 
freedom  would  be  only  nominal  ?     For  my  own 
part  I  doubt  not  but  that  many,  having  accepted 
of  emancipation  under  the  impulse  of  the  desire 


49 

of  change,  after  experiencing  the  evils  which  they 
must  needs  suffer  if  left  to  themselves,  would 
come  back  voluntarily  and  beg  the  protection  of 
servitude  again.  If  I  know  any  thing  of  human 
actions  and  their  principles,  I  may  take  it  upon 
myself  to  affirm,  that  no  laws  or  enactments 
whatsoever  could  be  effectual  towards  improving 
the  condition  of  these  people  in  this  country,  if 
their  present  relations  were  changed.  Their  con 
dition  of  servitude  may  doubtless  be  improved  ;  for 
it  will  admit  of  the  growth  of  many  excellent  feel 
ings.  This  can  be  done  only  through  the  medium 
of  the  master ;  the  sole  medium  through  which  ex 
ternal  influences  should  operate  upon  the  slave. 
Let  him  learn  the  true  nature  of  his  responsibility 
and  of  the  duties  which  grow  out  of  it;  remember 
ing  that  he  has  human  beings  in  charge,  who  are 
designed  for  something  better  than  to  be  the  mere 
instruments  of  other  men's  cupidity  ;  who  have 
good  affections  in  abundance,  which  may  be 
drawn  out  towards  himself  especially,  and  towards 
their  fellows  in  captivity  ;  whereby  the  burden  of 
toil  may  be  lightened  and  bondage  well  nigh  lose 
its  characteristic  of  servility. 

Shall  we  suffer  impatience  to  carry  us  into 
hasty  action,  that  we  may  make  these  people  free 
before  their  time,  as  though  our  enactments  could 
alter  the  established  nature  of  things?  A  tree 
may  be  stinted  by  human  means,  but  its  growth 


50 

cannot  be  accelerated  beyond  the  order  of  nature. 
Much  may  indeed  be  done  in  co-operation  with 
her  genial  influences  j  such  as  choosing  a  proper 
situation,  affording  culture  and  nourishment.    But 
when  the  plant  is  set  in  an  unfriendly  soil,  under 
an  unpropitious  climate  ;  when  in  addition,  it  is 
so  over-shadowed  as  to  be  deprived  of  warmth  and 
light  from  the  sun,  how  ineffectual  must  be  all 
attempts  to  rear  it  up  in  health  and  vigour !     Can 
we   hope   to  make  an   ignorant  people   enlight 
ened  by  our  knowledge,  and  wise  by  our  expe 
rience  ?     As  well  may  you  expect  that  a  tender 
plant  shall  be  brought  at  once  to   maturity   by 
infusing  into  it  the  sap  of  a  full-grown  tree.     The 
art  of  self-government  is  what  every  nation  must 
learn  for  itself.     The  school  wherein  it  is  taught 
is  no  other  than  that  of  adversity  and  suffering ; 
for  who  will  cleave  to  the  good  and  the  true  before 
he  has  known  the  fatal  tendency  of  the  evil  and 
the  false?     The  negroes  of  this  country  are  in 
their  first  rudiments ;  let  it  not  be  expected  that 
they  should  become  authors  before  they  can  read. 
Nor  let  a  mistaken  philanthropy  bewail  their  lot, 
and  seek  to  take  them  too  hastily  from  their  course 
of  tuition.     There  may  be  modifications  of  dis 
pensing  the  discipline  ;  but  it  is  folly  to  expect  that 
wisdom  will  come  without  the  toil  of  learning. 
There  can  be  no  complete  analogy  drawn  be 
tween  the  slavery  which  exists  in  this  country, 


51 

and  slavery,  as  it  has  existed  in  any  other  coun 
try  that  I  can  now  call  to  mind.  Among  the 
Romans,  the  son  of  a  freedman  became  a  citizen. 
Here  emancipation  could  go  on  without  the  dan 
ger  of  creating  a  separate  class,  who  otherwise 
must  needs  be  of  the  lowest  order.  The  enfran 
chised  were  gradually  incorporated  with  the  great 
mass  of  the  community,  and  became  an  integral 
part  thereof,  partaking  in  the  general  interests. 
But  in  this  country  the  free  blacks  must  remain 
a  distinct  class;  their  colour  is  an  effectual  bar 
against  their  admittance  into  social  equality,  even 
if  the  idea  of  former  servitude  were  not  repulsive, 
Emancipation  would  therefore  confer  upon  them 
little  benefit ;  it  would  take  them  from  one  who 
might  be  their  friend  and  would  throw  them 
into  a  society  where  all  must  be  their  enemies  ;  it 
would  deprive  them  of  a  protector  without  put 
ting  them  into  a  condition  of  protecting  them 
selves.  I  speak  of  them  as  a  people.  If  political 
rights  were  granted  them,  if  means  were  taken 
for  extending  knowledge  among  them,  the  natural 
tendency  of  such  policy  would  evidently  be  to 
build  up  and  strengthen  a  power  in  the  state, 
which  would  in  time  become  the  rival,  if  not  the 
subverter  of  the  constituted  authorities.  Emanci 
pation  without  political  rights  would  be  no  bless 
ing  to  them  ;  with  political  rights  it  would  be 
ruinous  to  ourselves. 


CHAPTER    III. 


LET  us  now  turn  to  history,  and  see  how  far 
examples  will  confirm  what  reason  seems  to  ap 
prove.  We  shall  here  find  instances  of  nations 
over-run  and  possessed  by  other  nations.  We 
shall  see  that  whenever  the  differences  between 
the  two  sorts  of  people  have  been  of  such  a  kind 
as  to  produce  strong  antipathies,  insomuch  that 
amalgamation  could  not  take  place  by  means  of 
intermarriages,  then  one  of  two  consequences 
must  follow.  First :  The  conquered  people  are 
reduced  to  slavery ;  or,  Secondly :  They  are  re 
moved  from  the  country  by  extirpation  or  expul 
sion.  It  will  also  appear,  that  in  all  cases  wherein 
a  union  is  effected  between  two  nations,  who  had 
been  strangers  to  each  other,  such  union  has  been 
brought  about  by  means  of  amalgamation  or  inter 
marriages.  Or  in  other  words,  such  intermar 
riages  are  a  necessary  condition  of  a  harmonious 
blending,  which  cannot  take  place  in  any  other 
way. 


53 

I  point  you  first  to  the  history  of  the  Israelites 
in  Egypt.  Here  had  been  no  bloody  wars,  or 
long-standing  feuds  to  embitter  feelings  and  give 
inveteracy  to  animosities.  The  Israelites  had 
come  into  Egypt  at  the  invitation  of  the  king, 
at  a  time  when  one  of  their  own  family  was  his 
chief  minister ;  they  were  received  with  kindness, 
and  the  finest  part  of  the  territory  was  allotted 
them  to  inhabit.  But  the  descendants  of  Jacob 
preserved  themselves  a  peculiar  people ;  they  ad 
hered  to  their  own  customs;  they  mingled  not 
with  the  surrounding  people ;  and  although  they 
were  doubtless  peaceable,  attending  to  their  own 
concerns,  for  there  is  no  hint  to  the  contrary,  yet 
were  they  a  foreign  people  in  the  land.  They 
were  not  assimilated  with  the  elements  of  the 
national  body ;  they  had  no  feelings  of  sympathy 
in  common  with  the  Egyptians.  The  result  is 
told  in  a  few  words  :  'Now  there  arose  up  another 
king  over  Egypt  which  knew  not  Joseph.  And 
he  said  unto  his  people,  Behold  the  people  of  the 
children  of  Israel  are  more  and  mightier  than  we  : 
come  on,  let  us  deal  wisely  with  them  ;  lest  they 
multiply,  and  it  come  to  pass,  that  when  there 
falleth  out  any  war,  they  join  also  unto  our  ene 
mies,  and  fight  against  us,  and  so  get  them  up  out 
of  the  land.  Therefore  they  did  set  over  them 
task-masters,  &,c.'*  The  lapse  of  many  centuries, 

*  Exodus  i.  8—11. 


54 

I  presume,  has  made  little  alteration  in  the  laws 
of  human  nature ;  the  same  course  which  the 
Egyptians  here  followed  would  be  adopted  now, 
except  that  political  slavery  might  be  substituted 
perhaps  in  place  of  personal,  or  entire  extermi 
nation  in  preference  to  either.  For  in  the  nature 
of  things  how  could  it  be  otherwise  ? 

In  the  course  of  events  the  Israelites  were  to  be 
delivered  from  this  bondage.  When  they  became 
free,  do  we  see  them  settling  down  in  Egypt?  Do 
we  find  them  claiming  an  equal  participation  in 
the  civil  and  political  affairs  of  the  nation  ?  Do 
they  demand  the  country  of  Goshen  to  be  restored 
to  them,  which  was  indeed  their  right,  for  their 
ancestors  held  it  by  virtue  of  an  especial  grant 
from  the  crown?  Nothing  of  all  these;  on  the 
contrary,  the  first  day  of  their  liberation  from  bon 
dage  was  the  first  of  their  pilgrimage  to  Canaan. 
How  were  it  possible  that  they  should  dwell  hap 
pily  in  the  land  of  their  servitude,  with  every 
thing  around  them  to  recall  the  memory  of  their 
degradation  ?  How  could  they  sit  down,  side  by 
side,  with  those  who  had  been  their  oppressors ; 
with  whom  they  could  not  harmonize  in  thoughts, 
feelings,  or  habits? 

If  the  Egyptians  had  been  willing  to  admit  their 
former  bondsmen  into  an  equality  of  political 
privileges,  and  if  the  latter  had  desired  it,  is  it 


55 

likely  that  this  participation  would  have  been  a 
bond  of  union,  a  friendly  harmonizer,  a  something 
in  common  wherein  sympathy  might  arise,  that 
should  become  a  principle  of  coalescence  and 
peace  ?  Alas,  it  would  have  been  but  a  ground 
of  contest,  an  arena  for  strife,  a  means  of  giving 
subsistence  and  form  and  durability  to  their  feel 
ings  of  mutual  hostility.  For  how  could  they 
exercise  these  powers  in  common  who  had  no 
feelings  in  common,  nor  objects,  nor  hopes  ?  We 
see  even  in  the  best  regulated  states,  how  ques 
tions  of  political  interest  cause  dissensions  among 
people  of  kindred  blood,  of  the  same  colour,  who 
are  bound  together  by  a  thousand  ties,  and  consti 
tute  one  community.  How  could  harmony  sub 
sist  between  parties  marked  by  national  distinc 
tions,  arrayed  compactly  the  one  against  the  other, 
like  armies  upon  a  field  of  battle,  a  mutual 
repugnance  already  pre-existing  which  prevents 
the  least  approach  towards  union ;  and  most  of 
all,  when  it  is  apparent  that  the  prevalence  of  the 
one  party  must  cause  the  ruin  of  the  other.  For 
their  particular  aims  are  so  diverse,  that  both 
cannot  succeed  at  once. 

In  order  that  they  might  enjoy  their  newly 
acquired  freedom  in  peace,  it  was  therefore  neces 
sary  that  the  children  of  Israel  should  seek  some 
other  country.  When  they  were  about  to  take 
possession  of  the  land  of  Canaan,  which  was 


5G 

already  occupied  by  a  rude  and  barbarous  people, 
we  do  not  see  them  entering  upon  negotiations  or 
making  treaties  with  those  tribes.  Nor  when  the 
invaders  had  gained  some  victories  by  force  of 
arms,,  and  had  made  good  a  lodgment  in  the  coun 
try,  do  we  find  them  making  use  of  these  advan 
tages  to  procure  for  themselves  favourable  condi 
tions,  and  thereupon  establishing  themselves  con 
jointly  with  the  native  inhabitants.  It  often  hap 
pens,  as  will  be  shown  hereafter,  that  a  victorious 
nation  after  overrunning  a  country,  settle  down 
quietly  with  the  conquered,  and  both  soon  come  to 
form  one  people.  But  here  nothing  less  than  utter 
extermination  could  give  security  and  permanence 
to  the  new  government  which  was  about  to  set 
up  its  institutions  in  a  strange  land.  May  not  the 
reason  be  seen  in  this,  that  the  two  nations  were 
too  far  asunder  ever  to  be  united?  The  chief 
cause  of  this  repugnance  was  religious  faith.  The 
institutions  of  the  Israelitish  government  were 
imbued  throughout  with  the  spirit  of  their  own 
theology,  which  would  admit  of  no  compromise 
with  the  idolatry  of  the  native  pagans.  Hence 
there  could  be  no  intermarriages  :  and  of  conse 
quence  no  peaceful  communion  of  political  powers. 
Will  it  be  said  to  all  these  illustrations  which 
are  drawn  from  the  history  of  the  Jewish  nation, 
that  they  were  a  people  under  the  direct  guidance 
of  heaven;  that  the  events  of  their  fortune  were 


57 

all  directed  to  a  particular  end  by  special  Divine 
interference  ;  that  miracles  were  wrought  at  almost 
every  step  of  their  progress ;  that  they  were  indeed 
mere  involuntary  subjects  of  a  superior  will,  which 
ordered  and  conducted  their  affairs;  and  that,  from 
these  considerations,  their  example  is  not  appli 
cable  to  human  transactions  in  general;  that  no 
principles  of  universal  policy  are  to  be  deduced 
from  their  history  ?  For  myself,  I  prefer  to  con 
sider  all  true  principles  as  being  in  harmony  with 
that  Supreme  nature  from  whence  comes  all  truth 
of  whatsoever  kind,  and  that  His  direct  interfe 
rence,  so  far  from  invalidating,  will  but  give  ad 
ditional  confirmation  to  those  rational  deductions 
which  are  drawn  from  the  experience  of  things. 
I  cannot  allow  myself  to  believe  that  violence  was 
done  to  the  freedom  of  human  action,  in  any  par 
ticular  of  the  Divine  administration  over  the  con 
cerns  of  that  people;  but  rather  that  all  his  dispen 
sations  were  accommodated  to  the  nature  of  man, 
to  the  capacity  of  the  subjects,  and  to  the  conditions 
of  their  situation.  There  is  doubtless  a  spiritual 
meaning  contained  in  the  history  of  every  event 
that  is  recorded  by  Moses,  and  it  is  generally  ac 
knowledged  that  the  whole  progress  of  the  Israel 
ites,  from  first  to  last,  is  intended  as  an  emblem  of 
spiritual  things.  Especially  is  it  a  type  or  picture 
of  man's  progress  in  moral  reformation.  But  in 
the  language  of  Paul :  'the  word  of  God  is  not 
6* 


58 

bound.'*  It  is  capable  of  unlimited  application  in 
the  harmony  of  truth  ;  and  all  principles  genuine 
ly  derived,  that  bear  upon  the  nature  of  man, 
whether  in  a  political  aspect,  or  in  his  individual 
relations,  may  find  confirmation  therein.  Why 
then  should  we  not  derive  from  the  inspired  his 
tory  of  these  remarkable  people  all  the  instruction 
which  we  can  find  in  the  same,  both  for  our  own 
personal  improvement,  and  also  for  political  wis 
dom,  with  an  humble  seeking  after  truth,  that  we 
may  understand  aright  ? 

I  have  already  alluded  to  the  history  of  the 
Moors  and  Spaniards,  wherein  the  same  principle 
is  illustrated,  viz  :  That  two  distinct  races,  so 
far  unlike  that  amalgamation  is  impossible,  cannot 
dwell  harmoniously  together  in  the  same  com 
munity,  unless  the  one  be  in  a  state  of  servi 
tude  to  the  other.  Here,  also,  difference  in  reli 
gious  faith  was  the  chief  cause  of  mutual  disso 
ciation.  It  would  seem,  at  first  view,  that  this 
would  be  the  last  cause  of  variance  between  peo 
ple,  for  religion  teaches  mutual  forbearance  and 
sincere  good  will.  In  the  Mahometan  doctrines, 
and  among  enlightened  pagans,  these  principles 
are  found.  Yet  it  will  appear  that  in  proportion 
to  the  value  we  set  upon  any  thing  is  the  jealousy 
with  which  we  watch  over  it.  Hence  religion 

*  2  rim.  ii.  9. 


59 

which  involves  the  highest  considerations  of 
human  happiness,  has  in  all  ages  been  the  occa 
sion  of  the  most  obstinate  contentions.  These 
strifes  have  doubtless  been  aggravated,  if  not  exci 
ted,  by  the  apprehensions  which  were  felt,  lest  the 
predominance  of  a  foreign  sect  should  endanger 
the  acknowledged  doctrines  of  the  national  faith. 
When  the  benign  spirit  of  true  religion  shall  pre 
vail  over  the  earth,  we  may  with  reason  believe 
that  such  contests  will  cease;  for  they  derive  their 
chief  aliment  from  the  human  passions,  which 
being  mingled  with  truths,  pervert  the  same.  Yet 
in  the  pure  state  of  human  society  the  distinct 
ness  of  different  nations  will  doubtless  be  pre 
served.  For  each  community,  following  instinc 
tively  the  natural  laws  of  sympathy,  which  unite 
like  with  like,  will  fall  peaceably,  each  into  its 
own  sphere,  and  there  will  be  no  violent  attempts 
made,  either  by  ambition  or  by  fanaticism,  to 
force  unions  where  the  voice  of  nature  has  pro 
nounced  the  decree  of  mutual  divorcement. 

But  it  is  manifest  that  other  causes  of  diffe 
rence,  besides  those  that  spring  from  dissimilarity 
of  religious  doctrines,  may  occasion  reciprocal 
repugnance  between  nations  of  different  origin 
and  habits,  if  an  attempt  is  made  to  blend  them 
into  one.  For  it  is  in  this  particular,  as  it  is  in 
physics.  There  is  in  all  substances  an  essential 
quality  which  philosophers  call  impenetrability; 


GO 

whereby  the  space  which  is  occupied  by  one  body 
cannot  be  held  at  the  same  time  by  another.  The 
occupancy  of  one  excludes  all  others.  So,  when 
a  nation  is  homogeneously  and  compactly  formed, 
insomuch  that  it  becomes  an  individual,  the  law 
of  its  own  being,  perpetually  repels  all  foreign 
bodies  from  invading  its  integrity.  It  may  indeed 
assimilate  foreign  elements  to  itself,  as  I  have 
already  illustrated  by  the  analogy  of  grafting  a 
strange  shoot  upon  a  mature  stock.  But  all 
accretions  from  external  sources  must  become 
blended  into  one  nature,  by  the  transfusion  of  the 
essential  spirit.  When  a  blending  of  this  sort 
cannot  take  place,  by  reason  of  repulsion,  then 
union  is  impossible. 

Let  me  direct  you  to  another  illustration,  with 
which  religion  has  nothing  to  do.  When  the 
Saxons  invaded  Britain,  and  finding  the  country 
to  be  better  than  their  own,  wished  to  take  pos 
session  of  it,  they  saw  in  the  original  inhabitants 
of  the  island  a  people  not  differing  greatly  from 
themselves,  so  far  as  civilization  or  religion  was 
concerned.  It  would  seem  to  us,  that  it  had  not 
been  a  difficult  matter  for  the  two  nations  to  settle 
down  together  ;  the  land  was  thinly  peopled ; 
the  government  undefined,  except  by  traditional 
usages;  each  tribe  was  in  a  measure  independent; 
society  seemed  indeed  to  be  nearly  in  its  original 
elements,  before  arts,  laws,  and  national  interests 


61 

had  given  unity,  firmness  and  individuality,  along 
with  that  rigidity  of  parts  which  belongs  to  old 
established  nations.  In  all  probability  this  union 
would  have  followed,  if  the  supremacy  of  the 
Saxons  had  been  achieved  in  the  usual  manner  of 
such  conquests.  But  we  are  told  that  they  were 
invited  over  at  first  as  friends ;  that  they  came  in 
such  guise,  and  no  doubt  with  friendly  intentions, 
expecting  no  other  compensation  for  their  services 
than  such  plunder  as  might  fall  to  their  share  in 
case  of  success,  or  such  remuneration  as  their 
allies  should  make  them,  according  to  stipulations 
either  formally  agreed  upon,  or  mutually  under 
stood.  The  first  step  however,  in  the  acquisition  of 
Britain  by  the  Saxons  was  marked  by  a  breach  of 
faith.  Having  driven  off  the  Picts  and  Scots,  for 
which  purpose  they  had  been  summoned,  they 
now  became  more  formidable  enemies  than  the 
barbarians  of  the  north  had  ever  been.  For  having 
helped  their  allies,  they  next  turned  to  help  them 
selves,  and  seized  upon  the  land  which  they  had 
undertaken  to  protect.  This  flagrant  injustice 
roused  the  indignation  of  the  deceived  victims ;  and 
gave  life  and  animosity  to  all  the  usual  feelings  of 
national  repugnance.  Henceforth  there  could  be 
no  confidence  between  the  parties,  and  as  a  conse 
quence,  no  friendly  amalgamation.  The  conquest, 
carried  on  by  fire,  and  sword,  and  horrible  barbari 
ties,  was  finally  consummated  by  utter  extermina 
tion  ;  none  of  the  native  Britons  escaped,  except 


62 

such  as  found  refuge  in  the  mountainous  region  of 
Wales,  whither  the  invaders  cared  not  to  pursue. 
Upon  this  foundation  was  erected  the  Saxon 
government  in  Britain  ;  to  such  a  beginning  there 
could  be  no  other  end,  that  might  combine  secu 
rity  with  possession. 

Will  it  be  said  that  this  reciprocal  hostility  was 
caused  and  kept  alive  by  continued  acts  of  aggres 
sion  ;  that  a  state  of  open  war  existed ;  and  that 
the  Britons  only  manifested  the  natural  resolution 
of  a  people  who  were  determined  to  maintain 
their  independence?  And  from  this  will  it  be 
urged,  that  the  example  affords  no  illustration  of 
the  condition  which  a  southern  state  would  be  in, 
if  her  slaves  were  made  citizens?  You  will 
understand,  I  am  sure,  my  dear  sir,  that  I  refer  to 
this  illustration  to  show  the  truth  of  the  principle, 
that  when  two  nations  are  so  dissimilar,  or  feel 
the  one  towards  the  other  such  mutual  aversion, 
that  a  friendly  amalgamation  cannot  take  place  by 
means  of  intermarriages,  these  two  nations  cannot 
dwell  harmoniously  together  in  the  same  com 
munity.  If  this  reciprocal  hostility  exist,  it  mat 
ters  not  much  from  what  particular  causes  it 
sprung;  whether  from  dissimilarity  of  national 
manners  and  habits,  so  great  as  to  create  aversion 
on  both  sides,  heightened  by  difference  of  lan 
guage,  such  as  would  repel  two  Christian  nations, 
English  and  Spanish,  for  example  :  or  from  diffe- 


G3 

rence  of  religion  combined  with  the  other,  in 
which  case  the  repulsion  would  be  stronger,  as 
between  English,  for  example,  and  Turks  ;  or  from 
difference  of  colour,  along  with  differences  in 
degrees  of  civilization,  the  one  people  being  refin 
ed,  the  other  barbarous ;  and  this  the  more,  when 
one  race  had  lately  been  in  servitude  to  the  other ; 
as  would  be  the  case,  for  example,  between  our 
own  citizens  and  the  blacks  of  this  country.  Or 
the  fixed  aversion  may  be  caused  by  outrageous 
violations  of  faith,  showing  a  settled  purpose  of 
oppression,  and  giving  evidence  of  little  safety 
under  such  domination  ;  as  was  the  case  in  the 
instance  of  the  Saxons  and  Britons,  just  referred 
to.  Or  it  may  follow  from  traditionary  enmities 
and  feelings  of  national  rivalship,  transmitted  from 
age  to  age,  until  they  have  become  woven  into 
the  national  character ;  as  was  the  case  between 
England  and  Scotland  in  the  reign  of  Edward  I. 
when  that  prince  attempted  the  conquest  of  the 
Scots,  after  having  duped  them,  in  pretending  to 
interpose  as  a  friend  to  setttle  their  differences. 
The  country  was  over-run  at  least  three  times;  all 
opposition  was  put  down  and  the  conquest  seemed 
to  be  finished.  But  it  could  not  have  been  effect 
ed  except  by  the  destruction  of  the  great  body  of 
the  Scottish  people.  In  short,  this  repugnance 
may  arise  from  any  causes  that  destroy  confj- 


64 

dence,  or  that  prevent  the  flow  of  sympathy  upon 
something  like  terms  of  equality. 

When  Edward  III.  had  gained  possession  of 
Calais.,  and  wished  to  affix  that  town  permanently 
to  his  kingdom,  he  removed  all  the  French  inha 
bitants  and  peopled  it  anew  with  English.  Mr. 
Hume  speaks  of  this  measure,  as  one  that  evinces 
the  wisdom  of  that  able  monarch;  and  it  may 
serve  to  show  the  reason  why  Calais  remained  for 
two  hundred  years  in  possession  of  England, 
while  her  other  acquisitions  in  France,  consisting 
of  many  provinces  and  of  towns  almost  innumera 
ble,  fell  one  by  one  from  her  grasp. 

I  go  on  to  another  illustration  which  is  now 
before  our  own  eyes.  When  English  colonists 
arrived  on  these  shores,  they  found  the  country 
occupied  by  an  aboriginal  race,  peculiar  in  their 
customs  and  but  little  advanced  in  the  arts  of 
civilized  life.  In  most  of  the  New  England  settle 
ments,  continual  wars  were  carried  on  between 
the  colonists  and  the  Indians;  in  Penn's  colony  of 
Pennsylvania,  the  two  races  dwelt  side  by  side 
peaceably  for  many  years.  In  neither  case  was 
there  any  approach  towards  coalescence,  either  civil 
or  social ;  in  both,  the  entire  removal  of  the  one 
people  was  a  necessary  condition  to  the  growth  of 
the  other.  I  presume,  the  distinction  is  not  more 
strongly  marked  between  the  two  races  of  Anglo- 
Saxon  and  aboriginal  Americans,  than  between  the 


65 

first  named,  and  the  African  negroes.  If  between 
either  two  there  be  found  the  fewer  obstacles  in 
the  way  of  a  peaceful  blending,  the  distinction 
would  seem  to  be  in  favour  of  the  native  Indians. 
We  could  approach  them  upon  terms  nearer  equa 
lity  j  there  are  no  degrading  associations  of  servi 
tude  connected  with  them,  for  they  have  ever 
been  an  independent  race.  The  example  which 
was  set  by  Mr.  Rolfe,  in  Virginia,  was  not  indeed 
generally  followed  by  the  colonists  of  Jamestown  j 
but,  so  far  from  incurring  odium,  that  gentleman 
was  thought  to  be  rather  honoured  than  other 
wise,  by  an  alliance  with  an  Indian  princess  ;  and 
the  descendants  of  Pocahontas  are  to  this  day, 
reckoned  among  the  most  respectable  people  of 
Virginia.  Nor  would  it  occasion  revulsion  in  the 
general  feelings  of  the  community  if  a  similar 
marriage  should  take  place  now.  I  need  not  ask, 
would  disgust  and  universal  abhorrence  be  with 
held  at  the  consummation  of  an  intermarriage 
between  a  respectable  gentleman  on  the  one  part 
and  a  negro  woman  on  the  other  ?  What  is  the 
inference  from  all  this  ?  The  white  men  and  the 
red  men  could  not  unite  peaceably  in  friendly 
coalescence.  They  differed  too  widely  ;  they  could 
not  assimilate  together.  But  do  the  whites  and 
blacks  differ  less?  Nay,  does  it  not  appear  that 
the  repelling  power  is  greater,  which  must  ever 
keep  them  apart  from  a  union  of  common  and 
7 


66 

equal  citizenship?  The  Indians,  it  may  be  said^ 
could  not  be  made  citizens,  by  reason  of  their 
wandering  habits  and  fondness  for  a  wild  kind  of 
life.  Is  the  restless  activity  of  the  Indian  a  greater 
disqualification  than  the  torpid  indolence  of  the 
negro  ?  With  a  disposition  on  our  part  to  receive 
the  native  tribes  into  our  political  society  (for  how 
many  efforts  have  been  made  to  reclaim  them!) 
it  has  been  found  to  be  impossible.  What  like 
lihood  is  there  that  a  purpose  of  a  similar  kind 
could  be  effected  between  the  whites  and  blacks, 
when  feelings  of  disgust  are  excited  at  the  bare 
mention  of  it? 

It  is  common  with  some  to  consider  these  anti 
pathies  as  the  effect  of  prejudice  from  which  the 
benevolent  spirit  of  Christianity  ought  to  deliver 
us.  Let  us  not  be  deceived.  Let  us  not  expect 
from  Christianity,  what  it  was  never  intended  to 
effect.  The  truths  of  that  sublime  faith  conjoined 
with  its  pure  spirit,  when  they  are  received  into 
the  understanding  and  heart,  do  indeed  change 
the  will,  and  expel  the  evil  affections  of  our 
selfish  nature.  But  the  constitution  of  the  mind 
remains  much  the  same.  The  character  of  a 
man,  or  his  internal  being,  is  made  up  of  the  ele 
ments  of  social  life,  knowledge,  feelings,  preju 
dices  in  the  midst  of  which  he  is  reared.  These 
he  imbibes,  and  they  are  fashioned  within  him 
according  to  his  disposition  or  temperament.  They 


67 

become  blended  with  his  nature;  they  are  his  con 
stitution.  By  these  all  the  manifestations  of  his 
active  powers  will  be  modified.  A  Mahometan  if 
converted  to  Christianity,  although  imbued  with  its 
genuine  spirit,  would  yet  be  a  different  character 
in  species,  from  one  who  was  born  and  reared  in 
a  Christian  community,  and  penetrated  in  an  equal 
degree  with  the  Christian  spirit.  Why  is  it  that 
the  Laplander  or  an  inhabitant  of  Greenland  loves 
his  native  hills  of  snow  and  ice,  and  prefers  his 
smoky  hut  before  the  beauties  of  warmer  climates 
and  the  refinements  of  luxury  in  civilized  coun 
tries?  Why  is  it  that  the  Indian  of  the  woods 
pines  amid  the  splendour  of  cities,  and  turns 
with  a  longing  heart  towards  the  dark  forest  and 
hunting  grounds  ?  If  we  judge  according  to  our 
ideas  of  the  convenient  and  the  beautiful,  such 
men  would  seem  to  be  almost  insane.  We  could 
not  understand  them :  we  should  doubt  their  sin 
cerity.  Yet  the  love  of  the  beautiful,  of  the 
convenient,  is  in  them  as  well  as  in  us ;  but  it 
manifests  itself  according  to  the  nature  of  those 
elements  with  which  it  is  embodied  in  their  own 
minds.  How  unjust  should  we  be  to  call  upon 
them  to  put  away  their  prejudices,  as  we  might 
call  them  !  They  could  not  admire  in  outward 
objects  what  we  admire ;  our  green  fields,  our  fer 
tile  valleys,  our  limped  streams,  and  shady  groves; 
for  there  would  be  no  associations  in  their  minds 


68 

wherewith  to  blend  them  with  delight.  Their 
childhood  was  passed  amid  different  objects  ;  and 
many  of  their  most  pleasing  recollections  are 
mingled  with  the  ideas  of  snows,  and  ice,  and 
wild  forests,  and  the  like,  which  we  regard  with 
feelings  not  of  pleasure.  They  might  complain 
of  our  antipathies,  with  as  much  justice  as  we 
would  have  in  contemning  theirs. 

The  southern  man  has  been  reared  in  a  society 
of  which  slavery  formed  a  distinguished  feature  j 
he  grows  up  with  all  the  associations  that  are 
natural  to  such  a  state.  With  these  his  earliest 
feelings  and  thoughts  are  tinctured.  If  by  the  ex 
ercise  of  an  enlightened  understanding  he  comes, 
in  after  life,  to  perceive,  what  he  has  not  before 
thought  of,  that  slavery  is  an  evil,  he  may  be  will 
ing,  nay  anxious  to  assist  in  putting  it  away.  To 
see  those  unfortunate  people  free  and  happy,  in  a 
condition  where  such  blessings  might  be  perma 
nent,  would  be  to  him  a  source  of  purest  joy.  To 
this  end,  he  would  be  willing  to  make  sacrifices  ; 
he  would  labour  zealously  and  in  good  faith.  But 
to  be  willing  to  receive  them  into  political  equa 
lity,  or  into  social  communion,  to  join  in  personal 
alliances,  would,  in  my  judgment,  instead  of 
showing  a  just  spirit  of  benevolence,  manifest  a 
total  disorganization  of  the  elements  of  a  health 
ful  character.  So  far  from  rising  in  good  esteem, 


69 

a  man  of  such  disposition  would  be  regarded  with 
distrust  j  with  something  very  near  akin  to  loath 
ing  ;  as  one  who  had  no  stability,  no  consistency,, 
no  self-subsistence,  no  fixed  principles. 


CHAPTER    IV. 


LET  us  now  turn  to  some  examples  of  history, 
wherein  different  nations  are  shown  to  have  coa 
lesced.  It  will  be  found,  I  think,  in  every  case  to 
which  reference  may  be  made,  in  any  history, 
either  ancient  or  modern,  that  amalgamation  by 
intermarriages  has  been  an  indispensable  condi 
tion  of  such  harmonious  union.  Whenever  the 
national  aversion  on  each  side  was  so  strong  as  to 
prevent  intermarriages,  no  matter  by  what  means 
this  feeling  of  aversion  was  thus  heightened 
beyond  mere  antipathy,  which  is  natural  against 
a  close  approximation  with  foreigners — whenever 
it  existed,  I  say,  to  such  degree  as  to  prevent 
intermarriages,  no  union  has  taken  place;  the 
two  races  have  lived  in  mortal  strife,  if  brought 
close  to  each  other ;  and  no  peace  could  subsist 
between  them.  On  the  other  hand  it  will  be 
found,  that  when  national  prejudices  have  been 
carefully  softened  by  the  prudent  management  of 
some  wise  ruler,  insomuch  that  intermarriages 


71 

went  on  between  the  different  races  j  it  has  hap 
pened  in  gradual  process  of  time,  that  the  several 
peculiarities  of  each  have  been  lost  in  the  common 
interfusion.  So  universally  has  this  characteristic 
marked  all  conjunctions  of  different  communities, 
that  it  might  save  time  to  ask,  not  what  are  the 
examples  in  which  this  mark  is  to  be  found,  but 
where  is  there  one  that  has  it  not?  In  all  records, 
annals,  traditions;  among  all  nations,  tongues, 
tribes,  clans,  or  communities,  of  any  sort  whatso 
ever;  in  all  climates,  whether  torrid,  temperate, 
or  frigid ;  in  all  diversities  of  local  situation, 
whether  upon  rivers,  or  in  islands  of  the  sea,  in 
plains,  or  upon  mountains;  in  all  degrees  of 
human  refinement,  or  of  human  barbarity,  from 
the  cannibal  hordes  of  New  Zealand  to  the  polish 
ed  community  of  Athens  in  the  days  of  Pericles ; 
under  any  circumstances,  whether  of  commotion, 
or  tranquillity,  of  poverty  or  wealth,  or  in  any 
other  condition,  wherein  freedom  of  action  was 
at  all  to  be  found,  I  demand  that  one  instance 
be  shown,  wherein  two  different  races  of  men, 
in  any  degree  approximating  towards  numerical 
equality,  have  united  peaceably  together  in  one 
community  of  citizenship,  without  having  become 
cemented  at  the  same  time  by  means  of  mutual 
intermarriages. 

The  Romans  received   the  Sabines  into  their 
city;  one  hundred  new  senators,  patres  conscript!-, 


72 

were  chosen  from  among  the  strangers  to  sit  in 
the  common  councils  of  the  state,  along  with  the 
original  patres ;  the  citizens  of  the  two  nations 
enjoyed  all  political  privileges  in  common.  But 
the  Romans  had  taken  Sabine  wives  before  this 
union  was  brought  about.  So  complete  and  har 
monious  was  the  amalgamation,  that  the  name  of 
Sabine  was,  in  time,  no  more  heard  of;  they 
became  one  people,  having  one  language,  one 
constitution,  one  country. 

When  Alexander  had  overthrown  the  empire  of 
Darius,  and  wished  to  unite  his  vast  territories 
into  one  body,  his  first  step  was  to  take  to  wife 
Roxana,  of  the  imperial  family  of  Persia;  he 
adopted  the  Persian  dress,  and  caused  his  grandees 
to  do  the  same ;  he  received  into  his  body  guard 
many  of  the  Persian  youth,  and  studied  to  do 
away  all  distinctions  between  the  nations.  Here 
however,  the  conquered  country  was  not  required 
to  receive  strangers  into  its  bosom ;  the  different 
communities  were  not  brought  into  near  contact : 
the  several  provinces  were  allowed  to  retain  their 
own  laws,  and  in  many  cases,  their  former  rulers. 
If  then,  it  was  found  to  be  proper  to  bind  even  this 
loose  connection  by  the  bonds  of  intermarriages, 
how  indispensable  must  the  same  provision  be, 
when  two  nations  are  to  dwell  together  within  the 
limits  of  the  same  territory  ? 

The  Romans  held  most  of  their  conquered  pro- 


73 

vinces  by  force  of  arms.  They  made  no  attempt 
to  occupy  their  extensive  territories  by  settlements 
of  native  Romans  among  the  original  inhabitants; 
nor  did  they  seek  to  subvert  the  laws  and  institu 
tions  of  the  nations  which  they  subdued.  Such 
was  the  overawing  influence  of  the  Roman  name, 
that  foreign  states  sought  shelter  by  owning  alle 
giance,  and  found  protection  to  be  an  equivalent 
for  the  loss  of  independence.  But  when  this  great 
empire  began  to  fall  asunder,  and  to  sink  under 
the  inundation  which  rolled  in  successive  torrents 
from  the  north,,  there  is  seen  a  different  system  of 
conquest.  The  barbarians  who  now  swarmed  over 
the  south  of  Europe,  were  disposed  to  occupy 
the  countries  they  subdued ;  and  here  we  may  find 
fit  illustrations  of  our  principle.  Do  we  find  it 
happen  in  any  one  instance,  that  the  Gothic  con 
querors  and  the  subdued  people  remain,  each  dis 
tinct,  retaining  their  respective  languages.,  manners 
and  customs,  yet  participating  in  the  same  politi 
cal  government?  Did  they  not  speedily  become 
one  people,  each  race  mutually  giving  and  receiv 
ing  of  their  several  peculiarities?  Are  not  the 
languages  of  European  nations  at  this  day  perfect 
specimens  of  such  blending?  It  is,  perhaps,  use 
less  to  dwell  upon  so  plain  a  thing,  yet  specific 
examples  are  not  wanting.  When  Alaric,  king 
of  one  of  the  invading  nations,  had  gained  posses 
sion  of  large  territories  on  the  border  of  Italy,  and 


74 

formed  a  treaty  with  Honorius,  emperor  of  the 
West,  he  received  in  marriage  the  sister  of  that 
monarch.  When  Clovis  over-ran  Gaul,  his  first 
act  was  to  unite  himself  in  marriage  with  Clotilda, 
daughter  of  the  native  Burgundian  prince;  by 
which  means  he  acquired  possession  of  that  pro 
vince;  and  what  was  a  still  more  important  con 
sequence,  he  was  converted  to  the  Christian  faith 
by  the  influence  of  his  queen,  who  had  embraced 
that  religion.  In  pursuance  of  the  same  wise 
policy,  Clovis  took  care  to  have  the  bishops  of 
the  new  church,  selected  from  among  the  native 
Gauls,  which  was  a  great  step  towards  removing 
national  differences. 

William,  duke  of  Normandy,  effected  the  con 
quest  of  England.  He  treated  the  Saxons  as  a 
conquered  people,  in  consequence  whereof  his 
government  was  nothing  other  than  a  rule  of 
force.  Under  his  son,  William  Rufus,  the  same 
policy  was  pursued,  and  much  bitterness  existed 
between  the  different  classes  of  his  Norman  and 
Saxon  subjects.  When  Henry  I.  usurped  the 
throne,  he  married  Matilda,  daughter  of  Edgar 
Atheling,  of  the  royal  Saxon  line,  and  by  means 
of  this  politic  act,  together  with  no  mean  abilities 
of  his  own,  he  was  enabled  to  maintain  his  seat 
in  despite  of  Robert,  his  elder  brother,  who  was 
the  rightful  heir  to  the  crown.  The  dissensions 
Normans  and  Saxons  in  England  sub- 


75 

sided  in  proportion  as  this  example  was  followed 
throughout  the  kingdom. 

I  know  not  that  there  is  any  need  of  dwelling 
longer  on  this  topic.  There  is  however  one  other 
illustration,  which  might  have  been  brought  forth 
in  the  list  of  those  examples  of  nations  that  were 
too  far  dissociated  ever  to  unite,  and  who  of  con 
sequence  could  not  participate  together  in  political 
matters.  It  may  however  be  none  the  worse  for 
coming  in  here,  inasmuch  as  it  is  especially  appli 
cable,  more  than  any  other  example  in  history,  to 
our  particular  concerns  :  the  parties  being  similar 
to  those  that  now  occupy  the  southern  portion  of 
this  country,  viz  :  whites  and  blacks.  An  advo 
cate  of  the  abolition  doctrines  thus  speaks  in  refer- 
riug  to  the  disturbances  of  St.  Domingo,  'The 
apologists  of  slavery  are  constantly  reminding  abo 
litionists  of  the  'scenes  of  St.  Domingo.'  Were 
the  public  familiar  with  the  origin  and  history  of 
those  scenes,  none  but  abolitionists  would  dare  to 
refer  to  them.'  *  I  give  the  'origin  and  history' 
in  the  words  of  this  writer. 

'In  1790  the  population  of  the  French  part  of 
St.  Domingo  was  estimated  at  686,000.  Of  this 
number  42,000  were  whites,  44,000  free  people  of 
colour,  and  600,000  slaves.  At  the  commence 
ment  of  the  French  revolution  the  free  coloured 

*  Jay's  Inquiry,  p.  171-2. 


76 

people  petitioned  the  National  Assembly  to  be 
admitted  to  political  rights,  and  sent  a  deputation 
to  Paris  to  attend  to  their  interests.  On  the  8th 
of  March;  1790,  a  law  was  passed  granting  to  the 
colonies  the  right  of  holding  representative  as 
semblies,  and  of  exercising  to  a  certain  extent 
legislative  authority.  On  the  28th  of  the  same 
month,  another  law  was  passed,  declaring  that  all 
free  persons  in  the  colonies,  who  were  proprietors 
and  residents  of  two  years  standing,  and  who  con 
tributed  to  the  exigencies  of  the  state  should  exer 
cise  the  right  of  voting. 

'The  planters  insisted  that  this  law  did  not  apply 
to  free  coloured  persons.  They  proceeded  to  elect 
a  General  Assembly,  and  in  this  election  the  free 
blacks  were,  with  but  few  exceptions,  prevented 
from  voting.  The  newly  elected  assembly  issued 
a  manifesto,  declaring  they  would  rather  die  than 
divide  their  political  rights  with  'a  bastard  and 
degenerated  race.'  A  portion  of  the  free  coloured 
people  resolved  to  maintain  the  rights  given  them 
by  the  mother  country,  and  assembled  in  arms 
under  one  of  their  number,  named  Oge.' 

It  is  not  my  purpose  to  speculate  concerning 
the  merits  of  this  question,  nor  attempt  an  inter 
pretation  of  the  act  of  the  French  National  As 
sembly.  It  is  enough  to  know  that  not  any  act  of 
that  Assembly,  or  of  any  other  legislative  body, 
could  have  brought  about  a  harmonious  participa- 


77 

tion  of  political  privileges  between  these  parties. 
I  believe  it  Avould  not  be  easy  to  find  a  more  com 
plete  illustration,  than  may  be  found  here,  of  the 
proposition  which  I  have  been  endeavouring  to 
set  forth.  Here  are  two  distinct  races  nearly  equal 
in  numbers,  the  whites  amounting  to  42..000,  the 
free  blacks  to  44,000 ;  they  are  disjoined  by  differ 
ences  of  colour,  of  blood,  of  condition ;  they  are 
animated,  the  one  towards  the  other,  by  all  those 
feelings  of  antipathy  which  are  natural  to  such 
dissimilitude.  What  makes  it  more  adapted  to 
our  purpose,  one  class  had  been  in  a  state  of  ser 
vitude  to  the  other.  Could  a  more  exact  picture 
be  drawn  of  what  would  in  all  likelihood  be  our 
condition,  if  the  mad  attempt  should  be  made  of 
introducing  negroes  to  an  equality  of  political 
rights  in  some  one  of  the  cotton-growing  states  ? 
Who  does  not  see  that  the  French  population 
of  St.  Domingo  were  only  following  the  natural 
instinct  of  self-preservation  in  thus  resisting  all 
demands  of  the  other  race  in  the  way  of  admit 
tance  to  citizenship?  Could  they  have  harmo 
nized  together  in  the  public  councils  ?  Would 
their  objects  have  been  the  same  or  in  any  way  pa 
rallel  ?  From  the  vast  body  of  six  hundred  thous 
and  slaves  would  there  have  been  no  accessions  to 
the  free  coloured  party,  which  was  already  superior 
in  number  by  two  thousand  ?  Or  would  not  the 
first  act  of  legislation  have  been  a  decree  of  univer- 
8 


78 

sal  emancipation,  when  by  such  measure  the  ques 
tion  of  predominance  would  have  been  settled  at 
once  ?  And  what  would  have  followed  this,  but 
the  utter  extermination  of  all  who  were  of  Euro 
pean  origin?  What  does  Mr,  Jay  mean,  when  he 
says  'if  the  public  were  familiar  with  the  history 
and  origin  of  those  scenes,  none  but  abolitionists 
would  dare  to  refer  to  them  ?'  Does  he  mean  to 
applaud  the  efforts  of  the  blacks  in  thus  seizing 
upon  what  they  deemed  their  rights?  Does  he 
regard  the  subsequent  horrors  and  butcheries  that 
closed  the  dreadful  catastrophe,  in  the  banishment 
or  murder  of  a  whole  race,  in  the  plunder  of  pro 
perty,  in  the  wildest  rage  of  licentious  and  bloody 
passions,  does  he  regard  all  these  as  the  fit  awatds 
of  letributive  justice  ?  And  are  we  to  believe  that 
he  would  behold  with  equal  satisfaction  a  similar 
scene  in  this  country  ?  Why  none  but  aboli 
tionists  dare  refer  to  them  ?  Is  it  from  this  pic 
ture  of  horrors  that  the  abolitionists  draw  their 
elements  of  the  sublime  and  beautiful  in  political 
morality?  Can  none  but  abolitionists  dare  refer 
to  them,  lest  they  be  struck  with  terror  at  the 
apprehension  of  a  like  calamity  at  home  ?  What 
means  he  ?  Or  what  means  he  not  ?  I  wish  he 
had  not  used  such  words. 

The  negro  slaves  of  the  British  West  Indies 
have  been  emancipated,  some  on  condition  of 
serving  out  an  apprenticeship  j  others,  I  believe, 


79 

without  such  condition.  In  neither  case  have  dis 
turbances  followed.  It  is  usual  to  point  to  this 
example  as  a  fact  which  overturns  all  theories 
concerning  the  ultimate  fatal  effects  of  emancipa 
tion  in  this  country. 

There  is  nothing  surprising  in  this,  that  a  race 
naturally  indolent,  having  few  inducements  to 
exertion,  should  sit  down  in  repose  after  being 
released  from  extorted  toil.  They  arc  not  a  peo 
ple  who  can  appreciate  freedom,  except  as  it 
affords  exemption  from  labour  :  they  have  little  of 
that  inward  ardour  which  springs  from  a  con 
sciousness  of  intellectual  or  moral  power  j  whicli 
prompts  to  enterprise  ;  which  delights  in  activity ; 
which  pants  after  independence.  The  casting  off 
of  their  fetters  has  not  made  them  freemen ;  al 
though  it  may  be  a  step  towards  it.  But  in  pro 
cess  of  time,  when  the  pleasures  of  indolence  have 
laeen  enjoyed  to  satiety,  a  spirit  of  activity  may 
<com€-  into  play.  Gradually  there  will  arise  a  bet 
ter  class  among  the  blacks,  who  will  possess  pro 
perty  :  and  along  with  it  a  sense  of  self-respect, 
and  a  consciousness  of  new  rights.  They  witi 
claim  to  have  a  part  in  the  public  affairs;  they 
will  demand  an  equal  participation  in  the  rights 
of  suffrage  and  of  legislation.  Then  the  contest 
will  begin.  Who  may  not  see  the  issue  of  it  ?  It 
requires  not  any  great  amount  of  prophetic  vision 
to  discern  that  al  some  period,  how  distant  we 


80 

know  not,  the  scenes  of  St.  Domingo  will  be 
re-acted  on  the  plains  of  Jamaica.  I  look  by  the 
light  of  reason  and  experience.  There  may  be, 
however,  secondary  causes  at  work  of  which  I  am 
ignorant,  that  shall  produce  a  different  result. 
For  example,  amalgamation  of  colours  may  go 
on  to  such  a  degree  that  the  individuality  of  the 
European  stock  may  be  diffused  throughout  a 
hundred  different  complexions  and  shades,  in  such 
a  manner  as  to  be  well  nigh  lost.  In  such  case 
the  ascendency  of  the  blacks  may  be  peaceable. 
But  every  indication  at  present  points  to  the  final 
predominance  of  that  colour.  Whether  it  be 
effected  by  violence,  or  by  gradual  course  of  amal 
gamation,  must  depend  upon  many  circumstances. 
Or  this  result  of  things  in  their  natural  course 
may  be  anticipated.  It  would  require  not  many 
of  our  modern  philanthropists  to  bring  about  a 
speedier  consummation.  Let  the  ignorant  negroes 
be  indoctrinated  with  notions  of  the  rights  of  man  ; 
let  them  be  taught  that  all  men  are  equal ;  that 
those  who  once  held  them  in  bondage,  and  who 
now  reside  among  them  in  splendour,  are  their 
oppressors,  proud  aristocrats,  who  live  upon  other 
men's  earnings  ;  above  all,  let  them  be  instructed 
to  know,  that  by  union  and  a  concentration  of 
their  strength,  they  may  enjoy  the  plunder  of  the 
whole  land  j  that  this  will  be  nothing  more  than 
the  reclaiming  of  their  rightful  property,  and  the 


81 

restoring  of  things  to  their  proper  equality  ;  let 
these  doctrines  be  infused  into  depraved  minds,  to 
the  arousing  of  dormant  passions,  giving  stability, 
pretext,  aim ;  the  issue  will  be  a  thing  not  to  be 
spoken  of  prophetically,  but  to  be  gazed  upon 
with  horror. 

I  do  not  presume  that  any  violent  commotions 
would  immediately  follow  an  act  of  general  eman 
cipation  in  this  country;  that  is,  if  foreign  influ 
ences  could  be  kept  away.  But  the  results  of 
things  are  not  less  sure  by  being  more  distant. 
When  the  tendency  is  apparent,  who  need  be  in 
doubt  concerning  the  end  ? 

That  I  may  not  in  any  manner  misrepresent  the 
meaning  of  abolitionists,  let  me  here  quote  again 
from  Mr.  Jay.  After  denying  the  charge  of  pro 
posing  to  bring  about  an  amalgamation  by  means 
of  intermarriages,  he  says  :  "But,  most  true  it  is, 
that  the  Anti-slavery  society  avows  its  intentions 
to  labour  for  the  civil  and  religious  equality  of  the 
blacks.  It  has  been  found  expedient  to  accuse  it 
of  aiming  also  at  their  social  equality.'  This  charge 
he  rejects,  and  proceeds  to  illustrate  his  meaning 
in  this  manner:  'We  all  know  white  men  whose 
characters  and  habits  render  them  repulsive  to  us, 
and  whom  no  consideration  would  induce  us  to 
admit  into  our  social  circles  ;  and  can  it  be  be 
lieved,  that  abolitionists  are  willing  to  extend  to 
negroes,  merely  on  account  of  their  colour,  cour- 


82 

tesies  and  indulgences  which  in  innumerable  in 
stances,  they  withhold  and  properly  withhold  from 
their  white  fellow-citizens  ?  But  who  pretends 
that  because  a  man  is  so  disagreeable  in  his  man 
ners  and  person,  that  we  refuse  to  associate  with 
him,  that  therefore,  he  ought  to  be  denied  the 
right  of  suffrage,  the  privilege  of  choosing  his 
trade  and  profession,  the  opportunities  of  acquir 
ing  knowledge,  and  the  liberty  of  pursuing  his 
own  happiness?' 

I  need  hardly  remind  you,  my  dear  sir,  of  what 
I  am  sure  you  know  well  enough,  that  touching 
the  subject  of  this  discourse,  I  am  not  considering 
the  blacks  as  individuals,  but  as  a  race.  If  they 
were  but  a  handful  scattered  throughout  the  wide 
expanse  of  a  white  population,  a  few  here  and  a 
few  there,  what  reasonable  man  would  wish  to 
debar  them  from  the  rights  of  citizenship  ?  For 
they  could  then  have  no  separate  purposes  of 
their  own  apart  from  the  general  interest ;  they 
could  not  act  as  a  distinct  body;  their  influence 
would  be  as  nothing.  But  how  different  is  the 
question  which  we  are  now  considering !  A  large 
population  equal  in  number  to  the  whites,  and  in 
some  states  perhaps  superior ;  prolific  of  increase  ; 
of  a  different  blood  and  complexion  ;  bound  by  no 
sympathy,  but  rather  disposed  (as  they  would  be 
most  certainly  when  raised  to  political  equality,) 
to  look  with  hatred  and  jealousy  upon  those  who 


had  once  held  them  in  bondage — a  population  like 
this  to  be  introduced  into  an  organized  community 
for  the  purpose  of  taking  part  in  its  government — 
is  this  a  small  matter  ? 

How  absurd  is  the  distinction  which  this  writer 
attempts  to  draw  between  political  equality  and 
social  equality,  granting  the  one  and  withholding 
the  other !  What  is  the-  end  of  political  power 
except  to  secure  social  advantages  ?  The  first  use 
of  political  predominance,  will  it  not  be  to  estab 
lish  predominance  in  every  thing? 

There  are  indeed  in  the  bosom  of  every  com 
munity,  'men  whose  characters  and  habits  render 
them  repulsive  to  us,  and  whom  no  consideration 
would  induce  us  to  admit  into  our  social  circles.' 
Let  us  suppose  that  this  class  becomes  the  most 
numerous  in  a  state  ;  that  they  are  bound  together 
by  a  common  interest,  by  some  sympathetic  bond 
which  excludes  all  minor  differences,  causing 
them  to  move  together  as  one  man  j  that  they  are 
inflamed  with  bitter  animosity  against  the  indus 
trious,  the  intelligent,  the  wealthy,  whom  they 
stigmatize  as  aristocrats,  monopolists,  the  oppres 
sive  class  that  grind  the  faces  of  the  poor,  or  by 
any  other  opprobious  name.  Will  no  dissensions 
arise  in  a  state  of  society  like  this  ?  Will  these 
men,  not  admitted  to  social  equality,  but  possessed 
of  full  political  privileges,  remain  quiet  and  peace 
able  ?  Will  they  submit  to  that  social  superiority 


84 

and  rest  contented  with  their  political  rights  ? 
What  would  their  political  rights  be,  in  their  esti 
mation,  but  a  mere  name,  unless  they  were  used 
to  gain  their  favourite  purposes?  And  what 
would  those  purposes  be,  but  a  complete  over 
throw  of  existing  institutions,  the  subversion  of 
all  order,  the  violation  of  all  rights  ? 

Let  any  one  look  at  the  manner  in  which  revo 
lutions  in  governments  are  brought  about,  if  he 
would  see  an  illustration  of  this  principle.  In 
France,  for  example,  the  lower  orders  had  taken 
little  or  no  part  in  the  public  affairs.  The  nobility 
and  the  monarchy  were  the  prominent  powers  in 
the  constitution ;  and  seeking  their  own  aggran 
dizement,  they  had  oppressed  the  people  greatly, 
insomuch  that  all  community  of  interests  or  feel 
ings  had  been  in  a  measure  destroyed.  A  sense 
of  common  injury  had  united  together  the  great 
mass  of  the  nation  ;  had  concentrated  their  aims ; 
had  caused  them  to  discover  in  the  higher  classes 
a  common  enemy.  When  political  privileges 
were  extended  to  the  people  by  Louis  XVI.  and 
they  were  empowered  to  exercise  the  right  of  suf 
frage  in  choosing  a  National  Assembly,  did  they 
remain  contented  with  this  participation  in  the 
general  affairs  of  the  kingdom  ?  Did  they  recog 
nize  the  distinction  which  this  writer  has  drawn 
between  political  and  social  equality  ?  They  did 
indeed  make  many  new  discoveries  in  politics  and 


85 

in  morals,  but  this  appears  to  have  escaped  them 
in  the  wildest  frenzy  of  their  madness. 

There  are  in  this  country  different  sects  and 
religious  denominations.  They  seem  to  move 
along  harmoniously  enough ;  they  exercise  politi 
cal  rights  in  common  j  and  social  communion  is 
not  interrupted.  The  reason  is  very  obvious, 
inasmuch  as  no  one  sect  has  cause  of  dread  from 
the  interference  of  another.  No  one  party  claims 
to  direct ;  all  are  parts  of  a  whole ;  each  in  its 
sphere  finds  no  obstacle  from  a  neighbour.  But  if 
the  whole  country  were  divided  into  two  great 
sects,  whereof  one  was  predominant,  and  exer 
cised  its  influence  in  controlling  the  affairs  of 
government,  as  would  certainly  be  the  case,  how 
different  then  would  be  the  state  of  things'?  One 
has  need  only  to  look  into  Burnet's  history  of  his 
own  times,  to  see  such  a  condition  fully  set  forth, 
in  the  accounts  of  what  followed  king  Charles' 
attempt  to  introduce  Episcopal  church  govern 
ment  in  Scotland.  What  dissensions,  what  vio 
lence,  what  bitter  animosity,  what  persecutions, 
what  bloodshed ! 

Let  us  not  lose  sight  of  the  principle.  If  the 
black  population,  I  repeat,  were  few  in  numbers, 
and  hence  little  disposed  to  aspire  after  the  direct 
ing  power,  no  harm  would  be  likely  to  follow  from 
their  admission  to  political  rights.  They  would 
then  conform  themselves  to  existing  laws,  and 


86 

would  desire  nothing  more.  But  when  they  as 
sume  the  station  of  an  equal  power  in  the  com 
munity,  Tind  of  -consequence,  a  rival  power — for 
their  aims  and  interests  as  a  body  could  in  no 
manner  blend  consistently  with  those  of  the  con 
stituted  authorities — who  does  not  see  that  the 
whole  question  is  changed  ? 

The  foregoing  considerations,  I  am  persuaded, 
are  such  as  would  come  naturally  into  the  minds 
of  most  persons  who  would  give  themselves  to 
reflect  upon  this  subject.  It  would  seem,  there 
fore,  to  be  of  little  use  thus  to  set  them  forth  ;  and 
to  insist  upon  propositions  whieh  sensible  men 
would  generally  admit.  But  there  is  no  presump 
tion  in  saying  that  much  delusion  prevails  con 
cerning  these  things.  I  have  already  alluded  to 
one  class  of  well-meaning  persons,  who,  believ 
ing  that  much  injustice  has  been  done  towards 
the  coloured  people  by  holding  them  in  slavery, 
are  now  in  a  hurry  to  recompense  them  ;  this 
one  idea  seems  to  have  taken  possession  of  their 
minds;  they  stop  not  to  examine,  to  consider,  to 
provide.  They  view  one  part  of  the  subject,  and 
believe  that  to  be  the  whole.  They  do  not  remem 
ber  that  the  blacks  who  were  brought  to  this  coun 
try  were  slaves  before — slaves  to  barbarous  savages 
of  their  own  colour  ;  that  so  far  from  suffering 
loss,  they  were  indeed  gainers  by  the  exchange ; 
and  were  perhaps  saved  from  death  by  their  trans 
portation  hither. 


87 

Others  there  are,  who  indulge  in  a  course  of  rea 
soning  which  is  exceedingly  dangerous,  being  the 
basis  of  all  fanaticism,  whereby  general  truths 
and  abstract  maxims  are  made  to  afford  counte 
nance  to  the  wildest  and  most  fatal  schemes. 
General  terms  are  made  to  comprehend  all  parti 
culars  ;  and  conclusions  are  drawn  from  words 
which  are  widely  at  variance  from  things.  Thus, 
much  discourse  is  had  concerning  the  rights  of 
man;  as  though  the  term  man  embraced  univer 
sal  humanity  in  all  varieties,  whether  of  barbarism 
or  improvement ;  in  all  conditions  of  society  ;  all 
forms  of  government ;  all  habits,  manners,  reli 
gions.  The  word  man  does  indeed  denote  a  large 
species  ;  the  highest  in  the  scale  of  animal  nature ; 
and  so  far  as  animal  nature  is  concerned,  the  term 
is  definite  enough.  For  in  degrees  of  bodily 
strength,  in  appetites,  in  outward  form  and  pro 
portion,  men  differ  not  greatly.  In  all  reasonings 
concerning  physical  nature,  there  need  be  little 
misapplication  of  the  name. 

But  how  vague  does  this  word  become  when 
we  speak  of  men  in  regard  to  their  moral  and 
intellectual  attributes;  when  we  treat  of  their 
rights  as  intelligent  beings,  and  of  their  several 
relations,  social,  civil  and  religious !  The  inward 
nature  of  man  is  capable  of  indefinite  expansion ; 
for  it  is  capable  of  communion  with  a  Divine 
nature,  from  whose  inexhaustible  fullness  it  may 


draw  without  end.  In  so  far  as  by  the  legitimate 
culture  of  the  nobler  affections  and  faculties  it 
makes  improvements,  it  holds  possession  of  the 
same  by  inherent  right,  to  say  nothing  of  the  right 
of  occupancy.  The  elements  of  human  know 
ledge,  and  greatness,  and  power,  are  of  unbounded 
diffusion  throughout  the  universal  sphere  of  this 
world's  circuit;  these  when  appropriated  by  the 
active  power  of  man's  intelligence  become  his 
own  by  virtue  of  such  appropriation,  for  they 
thus  become  parts  of  himself.  In  proportion  as 
knowledge  and  power  are  used  for  purposes  of 
good,  in  such  proportion  do  rights  increase,  and 
those  only  have  just  claims  to  rights  who  are 
competent  to  use  them.  There  is  no  good  thing 
which  a  man  has  not  a  right  to,  if  he  will  make 
himself  fit  to  enjoy  it  properly  ;  and  on  the  other 
hand,  there  is  no  good  thing  which  may  not 
prove  an  evil  to  him  who  rashly  aspires  after  it  in 
a  spirit  of  presumption  or  enthusiastic  self-exal 
tation. 

It  may  be  affirmed  as  an  axiom  in  this  country 
that  political  freedom  is  a  right.  How  would  the 
Turks  flourish,  think  you,  under  the  blessings  of  a 
free  constitution  ?  In  all  probability  after  having 
wearied  themselves  with  slaughtering  one  another 
they  would  be  willing  to  render  back  the  privilege 
of  cutting  off  heads  into  the  hands  of  the  grand 
seignor  and  his  viziers,  to  be  exercised  at  their 


good  pleasure.  How  long  would  a  republic  be 
likely  to  endure  among  the  serfs  of  the  autocrat? 
What  benefit  might  be  dispensed  by  free  institu 
tions  throughout  the  regions  of  Thibet,  among 
the  worshippers  of  the  Grand  Lama,  or  among 
the  Hottentots  at  the  cape  of  Good  Hope  ?  I  put 
these  interrogatories,  not  that  I  esteem  free  insti 
tutions  of  little  value,  but  to  show  how  absurd 
will  be  our  reasonings  concerning  human  things, 
if  we  blindly  follow  out  abstract  propositions  with 
out  regard  to  the  various  particulars,  wherein  men 
and  communities  differ  so  greatly. 

It  is  the  characteristic  of  fanaticism  to  be  con 
centrated  upon  its  end,  and  to  see  no  other  means 
except  such  as  promise  to  be  the  most  speedy. 
Hence  wisdom  and  reflection  are  banished  from  its 
councils.  Observe  the  mode  of  argument  which 
prevails  among  abolitionists:  'that  slavery  being 
sinful,  it  ought  immediately  to  cease.  Admit 
ting  the  premises,  the  conclusion  seems  irresistible. 
Sin  is  opposition  to  the  will  of  our  Creator  and 
Supreme  Lawgiver.  His  wisdom  and  goodness 
are  alike  infinite,  and  if  slavery  be  inconsistent  with 
his  will,  it  must  necessarily  be  inconsistent  with 
the  welfare  of  his  creatures.  Reason  and  revela 
tion  moreover  assure  us  that  God  will  punish  sin, 
and  therefore  to  contend  that  it  is  necessary  or 
expedient  to  continue  in  sin  is  to  impeach  every 
attribute  of  the  Deity,  and  to  brave  the  vengeance 
Q 


90 

of  Omnipotence.'  *  On  the  outer  cover  of  the  book 
from  which  this  is  taken,  there  is  a  gilt  picture  of 
a  negro  in  chains,  holding  up  his  hands  in  view  of 
a  liberty-cap  on  a  pole,  which  is  supported  by  a 
female  figure,  intended,  I  presume,  to  represent 
the  Goddess  of  freedom.  The  argument  and  the 
picture  seem  to  be  suitable  accompaniments,  the 
one  for  the  other,  and  are  alike  adapted  to  make 
the  same  sort  of  impression  upon  minds  that  can 
receive  either.  Sin  is  opposition  to  the  will  of  our 
Creator  and  Supreme  Lawgiver — Slavery  is  sin; 
therefore  to  continue  slavery  is  to  brave  the  ven 
geance  of  Omnipotence.  Who  made  Mr.  Jay  and 
his  coadjutors  first  judges  of  the  divine  will; 
secondly,  of  their  fellow  men ;  and  lastly,  the 
champions  of  the  divine  vengeance  ? 

This  summary  mode  of  reasoning  and  acting, 
this  appropriating  to  one's- self  the  special  favour 
of  heaven  for  the  purpose  of  judging  of  sins  and 
vindicating  the  divine  righteousness,  has  not  ap 
peared  now  for  the  first  time  in  the  world.  When 
the  Spaniards  took  possession  of  Mexico  and  Peru 
they  found  the  country  occupied  by  an  idolatrous 
people.  Now  idolatry  is  sin,  and  sin  is  opposition 
to  the  will  of  the  Creator ;  and  to  continue  in  it  is 
to  brave  the  vengeance  of  Omnipotence.  Or 
taking  the  first  proposition,  for  the  sake  of  brevity, 

*  Jay's  Inquiry,  p.  141. 


91 

as  they  were  not  given  to  tedious  deductions  in 
those  days,  idolatry  being  sinful  it  ought  imme 
diately  to  cease — they  appointed  themselves  forth 
with  to  be  the  ministers  and  executioners  of  the 
heavenly  will.  They  tore  the  idols  from  their 
shrines  ;  they  dragged  the  worshippers  to  the  stake. 
But  such  has  ever  been  the  nature  of  fanaticism, 
claiming  to  be  immaculate  itself,  it  has  ever  as 
sumed  the  functions  of  judge  and  instrument  of 
the  divine  justice  towards  men. 

But  inasmuch  as  fanaticism,  in  these  modern 
times,  can  no  longer  employ  the  arm  of  force  to 
drive  and  torture  recusants  into  a  desirable  confor 
mity,  it  has  fallen  upon  a  course  less  obnoxious 
and  more  flattering  to  its  own  self-righteousness. 
It  invokes  public  opinion,  it  arrays  itself  in  the 
garments  of  holiness,  and  having  taken  the  name 
and  title  of  Heaven's  champion,  it  denounces  all 
who  join  not  with  it  as  reprobate,  men  who  fight 
against  God.  It  would  embattle  one  portion  of 
the  community  against  the  other,  it  would  over-awe 
whom  it  cannot  destroy  and  make  those  hypocrites 
whom  it  is  unable  to  reform.  It  presents  in  its 
displays  a  second  exhibition  of  the  crusading  ma 
nia  of  the  middle  ages,  except  that  it  wants  the 
gallant  spirit  and  open  magnanimity  of  those  mis 
taken  champions,  who  sought  to  advance  the  cause 
of  religion  by  exterminating  infidels. 

I  confess,  my  dear  sir,  there  is  something  that 


92 

vehemently  moves  my  indignation  in  these  at 
tempts,  so  common  at  this  clay,  to  fulminate  pub 
lic  opinion  against  particular  abuses,  in  such  a 
manner  as  that  its  influence  comes  in  the  shape 
of  intimidation  and  force.  What  legitimate  power 
has  public  opinion,  or  any  other  kind  of  opinion, 
except  in  so  far  as  it  is  the  embodied  form  of  truth 
and  virtue?  The  passions  of  men,  inflamed  to 
ungovernable  violence,  do  they  lose  any  thing  of 
their  evil  nature  by  being  transfused  among  thou 
sands  ?  Do  the  specious  names  of  philanthropy 
and  liberty  avail  any  thing  towards  lessening  the 
mischiefs  that  follow  from  their  perversion  ?  Is 
it  the  first  characteristic  of  a  superior  light  and 
benevolence  to  thrust  their  possessors  forward  be 
fore  the  public  eye,  and  to  hurry  them  into  out 
rages  against  the  rights  and  feelings  of  others? 
Those  indeed  who  hold  true  principles  in  right 
eousness  will  readily  know,  that  one  constituent 
principle  of  such  a  spirit  is  to  keep  one  in  his  own 
place.  Is  the  truth  impotent  unless  it  be  con 
joined  with  human  passions  ?  Must  the  wrath  of 
man  be  invoked  to  work  out  the  righteousness  of 
God  ?  Is  there  nothing  terrible  in  the  words 
'vengeance  is  mine,  saith  the  Lord,  I  will  repay 
it?' 

Who  knows  not  that  there  are  evils  in  every 
community?  What  then?  Are  we  immaculate, 
that  we  can  assume  without  impiety  the  office  of 


03 

the  Supreme,  and  constitute  ourselves  the  agents 
of  his  justice?  Let  him  who  is  without  sin  cast 
the  first  stone  It  was  the  characteristic  of  an 
ancient  man,  that  he  was  ready  to  pardon  all 
faults  except  his  own.  We  have  lived  to  see  the 
maxim  reversed.  We  grow  wise  to  see  the  faults 
of  others  ;  we  become  eloquent  to  inveigh  against 
them  ;  we  are  full  of  zeal  to  suppress  them.  We 
learn  noble  truths,  that  we  may  appropriate  them 
to  our  own  purposes  of  pride;  we  are  ever  ready 
to  invoke  the  heavenly  powers,  but  it  is  only  to 
make  them  allies  in  our  strife. 

Is  there  not  a  better  course  established  by  the  all- 
wise  Ruler,  and  adapted,  like  all  the  principles  of 
his  moral  government,  to  the  constitution  of  the 
human  mind?  We  all  indulge  in  evils;  every 
man  is  addicted  to  many  which  he  has  not  him 
self  perceived.  It  is  not  in  our  animal  and  selfish 
nature  to  discover  these  evils,  for  they  are  of  a 
piece  with  that  nature  and  consonant  with  it.  To 
the  indulgence  of  our  evils  there  belongs  also  a 
delight,  which  diffuses  a  self-complacency  over 
the  mind,  little  disposing  it  to  question,  much  less 
to  remove  the  cause  of  so  much  pleasure.  But 
to  every  evil  there  is  a  sting,  which  sooner  or 
later  the  man  will  feel;  reflection  will  come; 
truth  will  shine  upon  the  understanding;  it  will 
be  seen  that  the  end  of  these  things  is  death.  It  is 
then  that  the  better  feelings  and  principles  within 
9* 


94 

us  strive  for  ascendency  over  the  evil,  what 
ever  it  may  be.  As  this  is  the  course  of  an  indi 
vidual's  experience  in  reformation,  so  is  it  also 
the  process  which  a  nation  undergoes,  when  the 
evil  is  national.  That  the  continuance  of  slavery 
is  an  evil,  appears  to  many  of  us  a  thing  self- 
apparent.  We  wonder  that  all  do  not  see  it  as 
readily;  we  are  apt  to  impute  wilful  obstinacy  to 
those  who  are  not  as  well  convinced  of  it  as 
we  are.  Shall  we  therefore  adopt  the  course  of 
those  over-zealous  persons,  who  pour  forth  abuse 
and  vituperation  against  slaveholders,  applying  to 
them  all  manner  of  odious  names  ?  Shall  we 
charge  them  with  horrible  crimes  and  cruelties, 
with  a  view  of  enabling  them  to  see  their  errors, 
and  to  convince  them  of  our  superior  righteous 
ness  ?  Nay — but  if  we  wished  to  rivet  them  in 
what  we  consider  their  obstinacy,  there  could  not 
be  found  a  more  effectual  course.  If  I  believe  my 
neighbour  is  in  error,  and  reprove  him  in  a  spirit 
that  is  not  of  love,  tempered  with  discretion,  the 
light  which  I  convey  into  his  mind  will  enable 
him  to  discover,  not  his  own  fault,  so  much  as 
mine.  My  arrogance  excites  his  indignation;  and 
the  strife  that  may  follow  will  be  but  the  warring 
of  evil  passions,  how  much  soever  I  may  assume 
the  character  of  a  benevolent  adviser,  and  affect 
to  lament  the  perverseness  of  the  other.  Blended 
in  the  inmost  nature  of  the  soul  of  man,  deep 


95 

within  his  heart  of  hearts,  dwells  the  inborn  feel 
ing  of  moral  freedom,  which  is  ever  alive  to  the 
slightest  impress  of  external  force,  and  jealous  to 
repel  it.  So  keenly  sensitive  is  this  life  within 
him,  that  he  will  not  move  in  the  course  which 
he  believes  to  be  right,  if  he  finds  that  he  is  to  be 
driven  to  it.  For  high  and  holy  purposes  was 
this  spirit  given  ;  for  when  once  it  is  deadened, 
man  sinks  degraded  from  the  dignity  of  his  spe 
cies.  It  is  the  concomitant  of  his  moral  responsi 
bility  which  would  be  an  absurdity  without  it.  It 
indicates  with  unerring  sensibilty,  that  in  matters 
which  concern  himself  and  for  which  he  alone  is 
answerable,  no  foreign  influence  has  a  right  to 
intermeddle.  In  unison  with  this,  upon  the  basis 
of  his  own  individuality  rests  the  structure  of 
every  man's  character.  He  ought  to  consider 
himself  as  occupying  a  place  in  the  world  which 
no  other  man  could  fill,  whether  the  same  be 
humble  or  exalted,  as  a  being  capable,  and  there 
fore  intended,  to  set  forth  some  peculiar  manifes 
tation  of  wisdom  and  goodness,  out  of  the  infinite 
variety  of  aspects  which  those  heavenly  emana 
tions  may  present.  All  elements  therefore  which 
he  imbibes,  whether  of  thought  or  of  feeling  ;  no 
matter  how  derived  whether  from  science,  from 
social  life,  from  observation,  or  from  experience, 
all  will  receive,  if  he  be  true  to  himself,  a  hue  and 
complexion  analogous  to  the  peculiar  constitution 


96 

of  his  being.  How  clearly  does  nature  illustrate 
this  great  truth  throughout  all  her  several  species 
of  beasts,  of  birds,  of  plants,  and  of  minerals, 
whereof  each  being  directed  by  no  will  save  that  of 
Providence,  grows  up  in  its  own  order,  each  after 
its  kind.  The  cowslip  and  the  lily  spring  up  side 
by  side  in  the  same  meadow;  the  like  elements  of 
moisture,  of  warmth,  of  air,  and  of  soil,  supply 
nourishment  to  both;  yet  each  absorbs  and  assimi 
lates  according  to  its  own  nature,  and  no  art  of 
man  can  make  the  one  assume  the  complexion  of 
the  other.  How  plainly  is  the  same  thing  indi 
cated  in  the  endless  variety  of  the  human  counte 
nance  !  Our  several  features  are  in  general  simi 
lar,  yet  of  the  myriads  of  human  creatures  that 
now  live,  or  that  have  ever  lived,  where  might 
you  find  two  faces  precisely  alike?  or  two  voices? 
What  does  this  denote  but  that  every  man  has  a 
special  individuality,  whereby  he  is  constituted 
one  integer;  one  unit,  that  amid  the  community 
of  interests  and  feelings  that  bring  us  together  as 
social  beings,  there  is  yet  in  the  moral  and  intel 
lectual  universe  of  this  vast  creation,  one  portion 
at  least  whereof  he  is  king — a  king  subject  to  law, 
but  possessed  of  an -awful  prerogative,  being  noth 
ing  less  than  of  misery  and  of  happiness,  of  life 
and  of  death.  With  the  internal  concerns  of  this 
kingdom  no  foreign  power  has  a  right  to  interfere; 
still  less  has  the  legitimate  ruler  a  right  to  abdi- 


97 

cate  his  sovereignty.  Is  not  this  same  principle 
set  forth  continually  in  the  Divine  administration 
towards  man,  wherein  force  has  no  part;  wherein 
the  attribute  of  Omnipotence  interposes  not,  and 
truth  itself,  'the  sword  of  the  spirit,'  exerts  no 
power  except  as  it  is  received  voluntarily  into  the 
human  mind.  In  the  business  of  our  own  refor 
mation  each  must  act  for  himself  and  not  for 
another;  the  truth  which  is  to  enlighten  will  come 
in  its  own  most  proper  way,  adapted  to  the  cir 
cumstances  and  condition  of  him  who  is  to  profit 
by  it;  and  the  same  spirit  which  imparts  truth  to 
discover  to  us  our  errors,  will  not  be  wanting  to 
aid  us  in  our  efforts  to  put  them  away.  It  is 
therefore  no  small  matter  to  know  how  far  our 
interference  in  another's  concerns  may  go  hand 
in  hand  with  duty,  and  to  mark  the  line  where 
friendly  solicitude  ends,  and  where  persecution 
begins.  It  is  impossible  for  words  to  define  it; 
the  heart  that  is  alive  with  love  to  God  and  man, 
alone  can  know  it. 

What  then  ?  Have  we  not  a  right  to  speak  our 
sentiments'?  Indubitably.  But  shall  we  make  a 
vaunt  of  it  in  a  spirit  of  bravado?  Shall  we 
declare  our  opinions  on  delicate  matters  to  all  the 
world,  when  such  utterance  does  no  good,  merely 
to  show  that  we  possess  the  right,  and  are  not 
afraid  to  use  it?  But  is  it  not  our  duty  to  pro 
claim  what  we  believe  to  be  the  truth  ?  It  is, 


98 

indeed,  to  proclaim  it  at  proper  times,  to  such  as 
are  willing  to  receive  it,  and  who  are  in  a  condi 
tion  to  profit  by  it.  But  shall  we  organize  socie 
ties,  raise  money,  establish  newspapers,  fill  the 
whole  country  with  excitement,  by  means  of 
inflammatory  harangues  and  publications  in  order 
to  convince  our  neighbours  of  the  truth,  when  in 
charity  we  might  suppose  them  to  be  as  capable 
as  we,  to  discover  it  for  themselves  ;  to  say  noth 
ing  of  their  sacred  right  to  manage  their  own 
affairs  in  the  way  that  shall  suit  them  best.  Per 
haps,  if  we  would  examine  the  nature  of  this  zeal 
which  is  consuming  us,  we  should  find  that  other 
passions  were  concerned,  besides  a  love  of  truth, 
and  a  sincere  desire  for  others'  welfare. 

But  if  this  impulse  to  declare  the  truth  be, 
indeed,  of  such  holy  imperativeness  within  us,  it 
is  surely  not  inconsistent  with  its  harmony  to  seek 
a  situation,  wherein  we  may  obey  it  legitimately. 
Let  him  then,  who  is  called  to  be  an  apostle  of 
freedom  in  this  matter,  introduce  himself  into  a 
community  where  slavery  exists;  let  him  acquire 
citizenship ;  then  will  he  be  authorized  to  take 
part  in  the  public  affairs,  both  by  voting  and  by 
declaring  his  sentiments  on  all  public  measures. 
He  may  recommend  whatever  he  thinks  may  be 
for  the  good  of  the  state ;  he  will  be  on  a  footing 
with  the  citizens  around  him,  having  something  at 
stake.  How  happens  it,  that  the  most  zealous 


99 

advocates  of  the  immediate  emancipation  of  slaves 
are  to  be  found  in  states  where  there  are  no  slaves 
to  be  emancipated  ? 

I  take  it  upon  myself  to  say,  that  the  people  of 
the  south  have  manifested  no  backwardness  in 
relation  to  the  question  of  domestic  slavery.  The 
time  was  not  long  ago,  when  this  subject  was  dis 
cussed  with  freedom  throughout  the  southern  states. 
It  was  becoming  a  matter  of  anxious  solicitude ; 
for  it  concerned  them  dearly.  The  process  of 
effectual  reformation  was  going  on  in  its  legiti 
mate  way;  truth  was  coming  to  the  minds  of  the 
reflecting  in  the  light  of  their  own  experience,  and 
was  operating  upon  the  unforced  will.  The  evil 
of  slavery  was  generally  acknowledged;  for  I  am 
persuaded  that  the  sentiments  which  were  declar 
ed  some  time  ago,  by  Gov.  McDuffie,  of  South 
Carolina,  were  not  held  then  by  the  intelligent 
portion  of  the  southern  people.  Most  of  the 
prominent  men  in  the  board  of  the  Colonization 
Society  were  gentlemen  of  influence  from  southern 
states.  Were  they  not  sincere  ?  Who  shall 
impeach  the  integrity  of  those  high-minded  and 
honourable  men?  A  full  avowal  of  the  sentiment 
was  made  by  Mr.  Clay,  at  a  meeting  of  the  Ken 
tucky  Colonization  Society,  not  long  ago.  Let 
the  life  of  this  great  man — a  life  full  of  noble  and 
consistent  actions — speak  for  the  purity  of  his 
motives.  It  was  not  longer  ago,  than  1831  or  '32 


too 

when  the  legislature  of  Virginia,  deliberated  on 
the  subject  in  no  superficial  manner;  and  there 
were  not  wanting  many  votes  to  carry  out  a  per 
manent  system  for  the  amelioration,  if  not  the 
final  removal  of  slavery  within  that  state. 

It  is  true  these  symptoms  have  now  disappear 
ed.  Where  shall  we  look  for  the  cause?  I  can 
find  it  no  where,  but  in  the  violence  and  misguided 
zeal  of  those  persons,  who  having  wandered  out 
of  their  sphere,  have  carried  confusion  whereso 
ever  the  influence  of  their  aberrations  has  extend 
ed.  They  declaim  in  a  vague  manner  concerning 
the  rights  of  man;  they  utter  abstract  truths, 
which,  general  and  indefinite,  may  by  a  rash 
application  produce  the  most  dangerous  results ; 
they  assume  to  themselves  the  name  of  philan 
thropists,  under  which,  any  passions  may  be 
indulged,  which  a  corrupt  heart  may  choose  to 
cherish.  They  reiterate  the  principle,  that  slavery 
is  wrong ;  that  it  should  be  immediately  abolished  j 
that  to  do  right  is  our  duty,  whatever  may  be  the 
sacrifice  ;  that  consequences  must  be  left  to  take 
care  of  themselves.  Those  maxims  mislead  by 
the  semblance  of  truth  which  they  carry  with 
them ;  for  there  is  not  one  of  them  which  is  not 
proper  in  its  place.  But  with  regard  to  general 
truths,  it  must  be  observed,  that  however  immuta 
ble  they  may  be  in  their  own  nature,  it  is  in  the 
power  of  human  passions  to  give  them  almost 


101 

any  hue,  by  blending  therewith  the  subtle  essence 
of  a  hidden  affection,  good  or  evil.  When  a  spirit 
of  enthusiastic  self-exaltation  has  taken  possession 
of  a  man's  mind,  there  is  no  end  to  the  perversion 
of  the  holiest  truths.  The  light  of  the  sun  is  in 
essence  always  the  same  ;  yet  how  infinite  the 
hues  and  aspects  it  assumes  according  to  the 
quality  of  its  recipient !  It  sparkles  in  the  dia 
mond,  shines  translucent  in  the  pearl,  and  appears 
of  a  dull  colour  in  the  common  stone.  The  genial 
warmth  of  the  same  sun  quickens  life  throughout 
universal  nature ;  imparts  vigour  to  the  growing 
plant;  fragrance  to  the  flower,  and  sweetness  to 
fruits;  but  in  some  substances  it  breeds  only  cor 
ruption,  giving  birth  to  worms  and  creeping  things. 
How  admirably  may  the  first  emblem  illustrate 
the  nature  of  truth  !  How  well  does  the  latter  set 
forth  the  quality  of  love!  In  the  harmonious 
blending  of  both,  as  nature  displays  it  in  the  beams 
of  the  sun,  which  give  forth  the  mingled  blessings 
of  light  and  heat,  how  beautifully  may  we  see 
pourtrayed  the  union,  which  the  order  of  Heaven 
has  established  between  benevolence  and  know 
ledge.  What  God  hath  joined  together,  let  not 
man  put  asunder. 

When  human  things  are  purged  of  all  evil; 

when   the   social   institutions   are   purified    from 

every  taint;  then  may  abstract  truths  find  perfect 

reception  and  absolute  confirmation  in  the  world. 

10 


102 

But  the  progress  towards  this  consummation  must 
be  gradual.  Truths  are  to  be  tempered  in  their 
application,  not  altered  in  their  nature ;  according 
to  the  maxim :  Quicquid  recipitur,  recipitur  ad 
modum  recipientis.  It  was  a  wise  saying  of  Solon, 
who  upon  being  asked,  if  he  had  given  the  best 
laws  to  the  Athenians,  replied,  'No;  but  the  best 
that  they  were  fitted  to  receive.'  Ill  health  is  in 
physical  nature,  what  evil  is  in  moral  nature.  A 
man  who  is  diseased,  has  in  some  way  departed 
from  the  laws  of  his  bodily  system;  or  has  receiv 
ed  his  malady  by  hereditary  transmission ;  in 
either  of  which  cases,  the  analogy  with  moral  evil 
is  perfect.  Who  does  not  know  that  the  remedies, 
which  are  to  restore  him  to  health,  must  be 
adapted,  modified,  tempered,  according  to  all  the 
symptoms,  circumstances  and  conditions  of  the 
disease?  When  the  distemper  is  of  a  chronic 
nature,  who  does  not  know  that  the  return  to 
health  must  be  gradual  in  proportion  as  the 
growth  of  the  disease  has  been  slow? 

Concerning  the  doing  of  right  at  whatever  sacri 
fice  I  have  also  to  say,  that  when  the  sacrifices 
which  are  involved  by  the  doing  of  what  one  be 
lieves  to  be  right,  are  entirely  a  man's  own,  there 
is  no  doubt  but  he  acts  well,  in  obeying  this  great 
truth  to  any  extent  that  his  conscience  may  direct. 
He  alone  has  the  control  of  his  own  self-govern 
ment,  and  with  him  dwells  the  responsibility  of 


103 

his  doings.  But,  unfortunately,  men  are  most 
disposed  to  involve  sacrifices  by  following  out  ab 
stract  maxims  of  right,  when  those  sacrifices  fall 
upon  others.  It  is  easy  to  gain  credit  for  great 
devotion  to  principle  at  the  expense  of  our  neigh 
bours  ;  especially  when,  in  reality,  we  have  little 
real  love  for  their  welfare.  But  I  have  already 
alluded  to  a  mode  by  which  the  sincerity  of  these 
philanthropists  may  be  evinced,  who  are  so  anx 
ious  to  do  right  at  all  sacrifices.  Let  them  propose 
their  plans  in  a  slave-holding  state,  having  first 
become  citizens  thereof;  then  will  they  at  least 
deserve  praise  for  the  purity  of  their  motives, 
whatever  may  be  thought  of  the  wisdom  of  their 
policy. 

I  have  said  that  the  indisposition  of  the  southern 
people  towards  taking  any  measures  in  regard  to 
domestic  slavery,  is  owing  to  the  imprudence  and 
over-zealous  interference  of  abolitionists,  in  mat 
ters  which  little  concerned  them.  I  wish  not  to 
misrepresent  these  persons  in  any  particular.  But 
what  has  been  their  course  ?  Let  it  be  told  in  the 
words  of  Dr.  Channing.  'They  have  fallen,1  says 
he,  'into  the  common  error  of  enthusiasts,  that  of 
exaggerating  their  object,  of  feeling  as  if  no  evil 
existed  but  that  which  they  opposed,  and  as  if  no 
guilt  could  be  compared  with  that  of  countenanc 
ing  or  upholding  it  The  tone  of  their  newspa 
pers,  as  far  as  I  have  seen  them,  has  often  been 


104 

fierce,  bitter,  abusive.  Their  imaginations  have 
fed  too  much  on  pictures  of  the  cruelty  to  which 
the  slave  is  exposed,  till  not  a  few  have  probably 
conceived  of  his  abode  as  perpetually  resounding 
with  the  lash  and  ringing  with  shrieks  of  agony.'* 
Again  :  'The  abolitionists  sent  forth  their  orators, 
some  of  them  transported  with  a  fiery  zeal,  to 
sound  the  alarm  against  slavery  through  the  land, 
to  gather  together  young,  old,  pupils  from  schools, 
females  hardly  arrived  at  years  of  discretion,  the 
ignorant,  the  excitable,  the  impetuous,  and  orga 
nize  these  into  associations  for  the  battle  against 
oppression.  They  preached  their  doctrines  to  the 
coloured  people,  and  collected  these  into  their 
societies.  To  this  mixed  and  excitable  multitude, 
appeals  were  made  in  the  piercing  tones  of  pas 
sion  ;  and  slaveholders  were  held  up  as  monsters 
of  cruelty  and  crime.'t 

Hear  the  result;  speaking  of  this  course,  he 
says:  'From  the  beginning  it  created  alarm  in  the 
considerate,  and  strengthened  the  sympathies  of 
the  free  states  with  the  slaveholder.  It  made 
converts  of  a  few  individuals,  but  alienated  multi 
tudes.  It  has  stirred  up  bitter  passions  and  a 
fierce  fanaticism,  which  have  shut  every  ear  and 
every  heart  against  its  arguments  and  persuasions. 
These  effects  are  the  more  to  be  deplored,  because 
the  hope  of  freedom  to  the  slave  lies  chiefly  in  the 

*  Charming  on  Slavery,  p.  153.  f  Ib.  p.  155. 


105 

dispositions  of  his  master.  The  abolitionist  pro 
posed  indeed  to  convert  the  slaveholders ;  and  for 
this  purpose  he  approached  them  with  vitupera 
tion,  and  exhausted  on  them  the  vocabulary  of 
abuse!  And  he  has  reaped  as  he  sowed.  His 
vehement  pleadings  for  the  slave  have  been  an 
swered  by  wilder  ones  from  the  master  ;  and  what 
is  worse,  deliberate  defences  ot  slavery  have  been 
sent  forth  in  the  spirit  of  the  dark  ages,  and  in 
defiance  of  the  moral  convictions  and  feelings  of 
the  Christian  and  civilized  world.' 

Such  has  been  the  course  of  these  men  who 
proclaim  themselves  the  champions  of  human 
freedom  ;  who  insist  upon  principles  with  a  child 
ish  intemperance  of  passion,  which  shows  that 
they  do  not -understand  principles;  who  advocate 
the  cause  of  humanity  with  a  spirit  of  vindictive- 
ness  which  belies  their  professions  ;  who  pretend 
to  uphold  the  rights  of  man,  yet  trample  without 
scruple  upon  the  rights  of  their  fellow-citizens. 
These  are  the  persons  who  would  interfere  in  the 
affairs  of  wiser  men  than  themselves;  who  would 
direct  the  course  of  legislation  to  sovereign  states, 
having  not  yet  learned  the  first  principles  of  self- 
government  over  their  own  conduct;  who  in  the 
arrogance  of  self-exaltation,  conceiving  them 
selves  to  be  possessed  of  all  wisdom  and  all  purity, 
are  kindly  disposed  with  congenial  charity  to  bring 
ruin  upon  men  in  order  to  befriend  them. 


106 

T  wish  these  sayings  to  be  applied,  not  to  the 
moderate  and  well-meaning,  who  have  unfortu 
nately  adopted  the  creed  of  abolitionists,  in  the 
belief  that  no  other  course  was  practicable  for  the 
removal  of  a  great  evil.  There  are  a  few  zealots 
who  have  been  the  busy  agents  of  strife;  these 
are  the  men  who  should  be  marked  as  unworthy 
of  trust,  and  dangerous;  men  who  pervert  truths, 
and  who  seek  to  lend  the  countenance  of  right  to 
measures  which  will  be  found  to  spring  from  their 
own  passions.  The  evil  one  is  never  so  much  to 
be  dreaded  as  when  he  makes  his  appearance  in 
the  form  of  an  angel  of  light.  It  is  the  part  of  all 
considerate  persons  to  try  the  spirits  ;  keeping  in 
view  at  the  same  time,  that  the  more  comprehen 
sive  the  principle,  the  more  dangerous  may  be  a 
rash  application  of  it. 

After  an  attentive  perusal  of  Dr.  Channing's 
book,  I  am  not  certain  whether  he  intends  to 
encourage  an  amalgamation  of  the  two  races,  as  a 
means  of  elevating  the  blacks  to  that  equality 
which  he  thinks  them  entitled  to.  He  must  either 
mean  to  recommend  this  course;  or  his  notions 
are  of  a  like  nature  with  those  of  Mr.  Jay,  who 
insists  upon  political  equality,  but  not  social.  In 
view  of  either  of  these  suppositions,  I  am  per 
suaded,  that  Dr.  Channing,  has  been  lending  the 
sanction  of  his  name  and  the  use  of  his  great 
abilities  to  the  propagation  of  doctrines  which  are 


107 

both  absurd  and  dangerous.     The  first  condition 
is  not  to  be  thought  of;  the  second  is  impossible. 
There  is  allusion  made  by  Dr.  Ohanning  to  a 
spurious  sort  of  amalgamation  that  is  now  going 
on  between  the  two  races.     This  is  one  of  the 
evils  of  slavery,  and  not  the  least  to  be  lamented. 
It  is  one  of  the  miserable  consequences  of  that 
enervation  of  character,  of  that  looseness  of  morals, 
of  that  licentiousness,  which  ever  creeps  in  where 
slavery,  long  continued   in  a  society,  invites   to 
indolence  and  unnerves  the  firmness  of  the  man 
lier  virtues.     But  let    no    hasty   conclusions   be 
drawn  from  this,  to  indicate  a  ready  disposition 
towards   amalgamation   between  whites   and   an 
emancipated    community  of  blacks.     This    kind 
of  intercourse  springs  not  from  affection,  such  as 
would  draw  equals  together  into  conjugal  union. 
It  is  the   mere  gratification  of  sensuality,  of  the 
lowest  kind   of  lust,  and   takes  place  only  when 
the   unhappy  subject   is  the   instrument  and   the 
property  of  another.     It  will  continue  as  long  as 
slavery  continues,  and  will  increase  in  proportion 
to  the  corruption  of  manners. 

But  when  once  a  decree  of  general  emancipa 
tion  has  gone  forth,  the  blacks  being  now  thrown 
upon  self-action,  the  two  races  will  stand  apart. 
There  can  be  no  union  of  affection  ;  there  will 
cease  to  be  any  of  lust.  Because,  it  is  evident, 
that  this  mongrel  intercourse  is  now  founded  upon 


108 

one  sort  of  relations  j  unlike  ordinary  concubinage 
between  parties  of  the  same  race,  it  would  cease 
with  the  existence  of  those  relations.  For  although 
it  may  continue  while  one  party  may  entertain 
contempt  for  the  other,  as  it  is  indeed  founded 
thereupon,  it  cannot  remain  when  hatred  becomes 
an  ingredient  of  the  feeling  between  them.  It 
would  be  well  if  the  southern  people  kept  this 
truth  in  mind  :  that  so  long  as  slavery  continues 
among  them  in  its  present  aspect,  so  long  are  they 
the  promoters  of  that  very  amalgamation  from  the 
idea  of  which  they  revolt  with  disgust. 

When  Mr.  Burke,  impressed  with  horror  at  the 
fearful  excesses  to  which  the  French  revolu 
tionists  were  hurried  by  a  blind  adherence  to  ab 
stract  doctrines,  had  in  the  strength  of  firm  prin 
ciple  voluntarily  sacrificed  the  friendship  of  a 
great  man,  he  exclaimed  with  heart-felt  indigna 
tion  :  'There  is  something  in  this  cursed  French 
revolution  that  envenoms  every  thing!'  One 
would  suppose,  that  the  eloquent  expostulations 
of  this  far-seeing  statesman  might  have  rendered 
men  cautious  in  giving  way  to  dazzling  specula 
tions,  engendered  by  fancy  out  of  the  elements  of 
truths  commingled  with  evil  passions ;  especially, 
when  such  expostulations  were  given,  not  as  mere 
generalized  maxims,  vented  in  the  heat  of  passion, 
or  moulded  in  the  coldness  of  speculation  j  but  as 


109 

sound  truths,  which  received  confirmation  almost 
at  the  moment  of  their  utterance. 

The  horrible  convulsions  of  the  French  nation; 
have  hardly  yet  subsided  into  a  state  of  tremulous 
quiescence ;  yet  as  though  we  were  to  be  made 
wise  by  no  experience  except  our  own,  we  are 
hearing  even  now  the  same  kind  of  haranguing, 
the  same  enthusiastic  proclaiming  of  general  max 
ims,  which  are  to  be  enforced  in  all  their  naked 
ness  without  regard  to  conditions  or  particulars; 
nay,  without  regard  to  the  inevitable  ruin  which 
must  follow  therefrom.  All  considerations  of 
prudence  are  to  be  silenced  by  some  such  brief 
method  as  this  :  slavery  is  sin  :  all  sin  ought  im 
mediately  to  cease ;  he  that  would  uphold  sin, 
Jights  against  God,  and  is  braving  the  vengeance 
of  Omnipotence.  Does  the  instinctive  impulse  of 
humanity  and  common  sense  revolt  at  the  thought 
of  what  consequences  must  issue  from  this  rash 
application?  The  answer  is  ready:  we  are  re 
quired  to  do  our  duty  :  it  is  not  for  us  to  look  after 
consequences .  What  awful  mockery  !  What  hor 
rible  trifling!  What  abominable  prostitution  of 
holy  truths,  to  subserve  the  foul  purposes  of  self- 
exalted,  self-righteous  fanaticism  !  If  any  thing 
less  than  the  highest  interests  of  life  and  property 
were  involved,  how  ridiculous  would  be  this 
solemn  assumption  of  judicial  authority  over  a 
whole  people;  lamenting  the  cruel  necessity  which 


110 

thus  enforces  them  to  be  severe ;  making  lachry 
mose  faces  of  pity  and  tender  sympathy,  while 
they  are  about  to  assume  the  heroic  magnanimity 
of  Brutus,  pronouncing  sentence  upon  his  own 
blood  j  all  going  to  show  the  noble  sacrifice  which 
they  are  making  at  the  call  of  duty!  Oh,  shade 
of  Polonius,  what  methodical  madness  ! 

What  a  magnanimous  sacrifice  is  this  which  is 
to  be  made  at  the  expense  of  others !  How  pure, 
how  disinterested,  how  holy  are  these  efforts  to 
emancipate  the  captive,  when  the  ruin,  the  havoc 
and  horror  that  must  follow  such  attempts,  made 
in  such  a  spirit,  are  to  be  spread  throughout  the 
cities,  and  towns,  and  hamlets,  and  domestic 
hearths  of  our  countrymen  at  some  distance  re 
moved,  but  in  which  the  philanthropic  agents  are 
to  suffer  no  part? 

What  think  you  'twas  set  up 
The  Greek  and  Roman  name  in  such  a  lustre, 
But  doing  right  in  stern  despite  to  nature, 
Shutting  their  ears  to  all  her  little  cries, 
When  great,  august,  and  godlike  justice  called^! 

The  only  difference  between  the  Roman  great 
ness,  and  that  which  these  modern  heroes  are 
ambitious  to  attain,  lies  in  this;  that  the  noble 
spirits  of  antiquity  barkened  to  the  call  of  godlike 
justice,  when  themselves  were  to  be  the  sacrifices, 
fas  he  of  Carthage,  an  immortal  name,'  whereas, 


Ill 

our  aspirants  are  most  heroic  when  others  are  to 
be  the  victims. 

I  reiterate  what  was  before  asserted  that  the 
people  of  the  south  have  shown  no  extraordinary 
backwardness  in  considering  the  matter  of  domes 
tic  slavery,  which  being  an  institution  of  their 
own,  they  alone  were  chiefly  interested  in  consi 
dering.  They  were  beginning  to  perceive  the 
evil  of  slavery  precisely  in  the  manner  in  which 
any  evil  is  perceived,  by  its  consequences  upon 
themselves.  For  the  analogy  is  perfect  in  this 
particular,  between  a  nation  and  an  individual. 
We  are  not  disposed  to  see  evil  in  that  which 
ministers  to  our  delight  or  to  our  interest,  until  by 
its  effects  we  are  made  to  perceive,  that  it  is  not 
in  harmony  with  our  happiness  ;  that  its  ultimate 
issue  will  be  ruinous.  Upon  this  discovery  the 
moral  principles  are  not  slow  in  asserting  their 
supremacy;  and  in  a  man,  or  in  a  community,  if 
the  evil  be  national,  where  any  redeeming  power 
yet  remains  in  its  integrity,  reformation  will  begin, 
and  it  will  continue  to  advance  precisely  in  pro 
portion  as  the  mind  receives  light,  and  as  the  cir 
cumstances  of  the  case  will  admit  the  application 
of  truths.  But  the  great  truth  cannot  be  too  often 
remembered,  that  this  is  the  work  of  the  indivi 
dual  ;  whether  the  individual  be  a  man  or  a  nation. 
Whatever  influence  may  come  from  abroad,  it 
should  come  in  such  shape  of  candour  or  affec- 


112 

donate  sympathy,  as  that  the  reception  of  it  shall 
be  voluntary.  Bui  let  no  arrogant  self-superiority, 
no  assumed  solicitude  of  mawkish  compassion,  no 
denunciations  of  zeal,  claiming  to  be  holy,  dare 
intrude  upon  the  sacred  province  of  human  free 
agency,  to  violate  those  high  prerogatives  which 
omnipotence  will  not  infringe  even  to  shield  re 
sponsible  agents  from  destruction.  For  in  the 
awful  dignity  of  moral  existence  the  touch  of  vio 
lence  to  this  spirit  of  being  is  little  less  than  death. 
But  how  entirely  is  all  this  overbearing  anxiety 
a  work  of  supererogation?  Are  there  not  men  of 
good  hearts  and  intelligent  minds  among  the  peo 
ple  of  the  slave-holding  states  ?  Who  doubts  that 
the  south  contains  within  itself  all  the  elements 
that  are  necessary  to  self-redemption  from  any 
evils  into  which  the  inadvertence  of  former  gene 
rations  have  brought  it?  Not  only  has  a  proper 
disposition  been  manifested  by  the  wise  and  good 
of  the  southern  people  towards  considering  the 
subject  of  domestic  slavery ;  but,  unlike  the  blind 
agitations  which  are  often  the  premonitory  tokens 
of  a  coming  reformation,  their  efforts  seem  to 
have  been  fortunate  in  an  uncommon  degree,  as  it 
respects  the  direction  which  their  plans  have 
taken.  They  have  hit  upon  the  principle,  which 
I  make  bold  to  affirm,  is  the  only  principle,  upon 
which  any  safe  and  effectual  system  can  be  de 
vised  of  ultimately  delivering  this  country  from 


113 

the  evil  of  slavery,  with  security  at  once  to  both 
races,  and  with  any  prospect  of  final  good  to  the 
blacks.  I  do  not  say  that  the  first  organization  of 
the  Colonization  Society  was  adapted  to  this  end. 
I  believe  it  was  not.  It  must  be  the  work  of  each 
state  separately,  after  the  manner  of  Maryland — a 
state  which  has  the  honour  of  taking  the  second 
step  in  the  gradual  progress  of  this  great  work. 

I  am  willing,  rny  dear  sir,  to  helieve  that  in  the 
conception  of  this  sdierne,  there  is  to  be  seen  the 
germ  of  a  future  growth  of  blended  wisdom  and 
benevolence,  which  shall  be  the  glory  of  this  coun 
try  and  of  the  age.  Is  it  objected  that  no  provi 
sion  is  made  for  the  emancipation  of  slaves  ?  Let 
not  impatience  outrun  the  order  of  things.  Every 
work  must  have  a  beginning,  whether  the  design 
be  great  or  small,  and  perfection  is  not  usually 
the  characteristic  of  beginnings.  I  had  designed 
to  dwell  at.  large  upon  the  plan  and  prospects  of 
African  colonization,  but,  to  tell  the  truth,  I  am 
wearied  with  writing,  as  I  fear  you  will  be  with 
reading,  so  long  a  letter;  although  I  have  broken 
•  he  epistle  into  chapters  for  the  convenience  of  rest 
ing  places.  If  my  intention  hold,  and  your  pa 
tience  be  not  exhausted,  I  will  treat  of  those  topics 
in  a  future  letter.  I  shall  then  briefly  notice  coloni 
zation  ;  that  it  is  no  new  or  untried  system,  but 
that  it  has  been  practised  continually  in  all  ages  of 
the  world,  since  the  days  of  Noah :  that  colonies 

ir 


114 

have  generally  outstripped  the  parent  country,  ns 
may  he  illustrated  by  numerous  examples  in  history, 
both  ancient  and  modern.  It  would  be  worth 
while  for  some  competent  man  to  write  a  book  on 
this  particular  view  ;  showing  hour  transplantation 
operates  to  change  the  character,  by  placing  men 
in  situations,  wherein  the  personal  responsibility 
of  each  is  directly  felt,  and  every  one  is  brought 
to  rely  upon  his  own  exertions.  1  shall  consider 
African  colonization,  particularly ;  how  it  differs 
from  all  other  examples  of  colonization  in  many 
particulars,  all  of  which  are  to  its  advantage;  how 
the  special  direction  of  Providence  seems  manifest 
in  making  the  captivity  of  the  negroes  in  this 
country  the  means  of  introducing  knowledge  and 
civilization  into  Africa,  which  in  the  ordinary 
course  of  human  thing?,  would  hardly  gain  admit 
tance  in  any  other  manner. 

I  am  sure  it  is  not  a  vain  imagination  that  fills 
my  mind,  when  I  view  in  prospect,  the  future 
glory  of  this  great  undertaking.  1  found  my  prog 
nostications  upon  the  nobleness  of  the  principles 
which  are  at  its  basis.  There  have  been  colonies 
planted  for  purposes  of  trade,  as  those  of  the  Dutch 
in  the  East  Indies,  and  of  the  English  at  the  Cape 
of  Good  Hope  ;  there  have  been  settlements  made 
in  foreign  parts  by  reason  of  violence  and  persecu 
tion  at  home  ;  or  in  avaricious  pursuits  of  gold ;  or 
to  serve  as  receptacles  for  the  emptying  of  domes- 


115 

tic  jails  ;  but  never  before  in  the  history  of  human 
kind  has  benevolence  thus  sought  to  propagate 
itself  by  the  deliverance  of  captives  ;  by  the  raising 
up  of  the  oppressed ;  by  the  nurture  and  protec 
tion  of  the  unfriended.  I  sincerely  hope,  that  the 
excellent  spirit  which  has  quickened  this  great 
system  into  birth,  may  brood  over  its  infancy ; 
may  continue  to  direct  its  unfolding  energies  ;  may 
never  depart  from  it;  but  may  remain  henceforth 
to  insure  a  consummation  which  shall  be  worthy 
of  such  a  beginning. 

With  much  esteem,  I  remain, 

Dear  sir,  yours,  Sec. 


? 

ALL  BOO* 
Renewals 
Books  ma 

10 

i! 

H  m 

Si 

\\ 

^~ 

!     a     <s> 

r-  ^ 

a 

c 

3       ft 

go 

m  o 

8' 

NJ 

m 

5        Q        "^ 

i 

^ 

i    <a     » 

^^  i 

ul 

s«S 

Cn 

NO 

Q  I 

i/) 

«<     3     i— 

D  ; 

• 

2    •<     m 

^^ 

=         o 

i 

2 

5'    §"   > 
<o    3    5 

f! 

8.  5 

Q  ' 

m 

0*      0       x| 

~^  | 

a 

fe   **   o 

*^  1 

09 

n   §•   $ 

* 
• 

m 

*"    •" 

0 

•? 

o" 

T 

0 

CO 

* 

m 
m 
1 

^ 

3- 

• 
1 

• 
| 

O. 
C 

• 

1 

U.C.  BERKELEY  LIBRARIES 


CD070D7E07 


